Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 01, 2014, 01:44:00 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Election What-ifs? (Moderators: Bacon King, Dallasfan65)
| | |-+  The Crisis of Sucession: 1865
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Author Topic: The Crisis of Sucession: 1865  (Read 3241 times)
MooMooMoo
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12249
United States


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: September 04, 2012, 04:52:07 pm »
Ignore

...but it has already been established that the Republican Party would split..
Logged


the result is a sense that we were told to attend a lavish dinner party that was going to be wonderful and by the time we got there, all the lobster and steak had been eaten, a fight had broken out, the police had been called and all that was left was warm beer and chips.
[/quot
Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: September 04, 2012, 09:18:21 pm »
Ignore

I was just thinking that Grant might serve as a united figure. Too bad he's dead. Sad I'm thinking that other Civil War leaders might be pushed forward as a unity candidate. A couple of our Presidents, Hayes, Garfield, and Harrison, all served in some leadership positions in the Civil War.
They probably would with ample notice but if they were informed they were going to have 3/4 months to put up a campaign and unite a deeply divided group of voters not to mention get their name out in other states where they might not be well known I'm not positive they would have agreed........ but yes as stated above they are super divided and the only realistic figure for unification I believe would be Stanton and he turned down running.....
Logged
Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: September 05, 2012, 12:45:38 am »
Ignore

1865 Radical Republican Party Special National Convention PART 1

The Radical Convention began in New York on July 10th in New York City. When delegates arrived many were still undecided on which candidate to choose. In the mid Afternoon the crowd at the Convention Hall was in awe with their Speaker. President Stanton, himself, was officially addressing the Delegates/Convention goers. His speech was being well received and was considered both educational and witty. He did mention he'd be traveling to Chicago in the next week but his most important line in the speech was: "and so delegates I ask of you to vote for one man. A true Patriot while our nation was in distress, Schuyler Colfax!" The crowd erupted in cheers and boos simultaneously and shock was everywhere. Thaddeus Stevens the "darling" of the Radical movement and a Presidential Candidate was outraged and confronted the President following the speech in one of the hallways.  As voting was scheduled to begin within hours he believed Stanton ruined his chances.

The first ballot was surprisingly close, Colfax and Stevens were tied and Fremont came in a close third. All other candidates but these 3 dropped out following the initial results. No candidate, however, had gained a delegate majority so a second ballot was scheduled with the 3 remaining candidates.......

The 1st Ballot
Colfax- 152 32.6%
Stevens- 147 31.6%
Fremont- 136 29.2%
Sumner- 19 4.0%
Wade- 11 2.3%

Total- 465 Delegates
233 needed for majority

Logged
Gass3268
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4200
United States


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: September 05, 2012, 03:14:06 pm »
Ignore

Any chance that we could see a Radical Republican Congress consider redrawing the boarders of the states of the Confederacy when they are admitted in order to create states that are bound to vote for Republicans. Basically a Gerrymander of the South. Off the top of my head I can think of 3 to 4 Appalachian states and 4-5 majority black states that could be created. I'll make a map of what I'm trying to say.
Logged
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: September 05, 2012, 03:35:05 pm »
Ignore

Any chance that we could see a Radical Republican Congress consider redrawing the boarders of the states of the Confederacy when they are admitted in order to create states that are bound to vote for Republicans. Basically a Gerrymander of the South. Off the top of my head I can think of 3 to 4 Appalachian states and 4-5 majority black states that could be created. I'll make a map of what I'm trying to say.

That'd be pretty cool. Basically just leaving the tobacco and plains areas to Democrats.
Logged

Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 05, 2012, 04:25:46 pm »
Ignore

Any chance that we could see a Radical Republican Congress consider redrawing the boarders of the states of the Confederacy when they are admitted in order to create states that are bound to vote for Republicans. Basically a Gerrymander of the South. Off the top of my head I can think of 3 to 4 Appalachian states and 4-5 majority black states that could be created. I'll make a map of what I'm trying to say.
Thatd be cool if you could make the map cause im a little short on time..... I hadn't thought of it but I suppose it'd make plenty sense!
Logged
Gass3268
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4200
United States


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: September 05, 2012, 09:30:17 pm »
Ignore

« Last Edit: September 05, 2012, 09:32:26 pm by Gass3268 »Logged
Gass3268
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4200
United States


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: September 05, 2012, 10:16:54 pm »
Ignore

Goals of the Map of the New South

1.   Create 5 African-American majority or plurality states, based on 1860 slavery census numbers. This was done in Northeast North Carolina/ Southeast Virginia, Eastern Georgia/ a majority of South Carolina, Northern Florida/Southwestern Georgia, Central Alabama/Western Georgia, Mississippi River Delta consisting of counties from Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee, and lastly Eastern Texas.
2.   Create 2 Pro-Union Appalachian states loosely based on the county votes for secession. This was done in Western North Carolina/Eastern Tennessee and Northern Alabama, Northern Georgia and Western South Carolina.
3.   Reward the Border States and territories that remained loyal to the Union. This including expanding Maryland, Washington DC and West Virginia into Virginia, expanding Kentucky along the Mississippi into Tennessee, expanding Missouri into Northern Arkansas and Indian Territory/Oklahoma into the Texas Panhandle.
4.   Divide Texas into 3.  A plurality African-American state in East Texas, a Central Texas state and returning the low populated Western/Southern Texas back to a territory.
5.   The remaining areas 6 areas will become overly majority white. Also when making the map I wanted to restrict their access to the Mississippi River.
6.   Lastly I was thinking about the renaming of the States. The African-American, Pro-Union and Border States states would be able to name their states as they wish. The 6 Rebel States would have their names chosen by the Federal Government. Some Ideas would be Lincoln for the Central North Carolina/Central Virginia state, Sherman for what’s left of Georgia, Johnson for Eastern Mississippi/Western Tennessee, Grant for Southern Arkansas/Western Louisiana, Houston for Central Texas, Rio Grande for the new Southern/Western Texas Territory, Farragut for West Florida and Seward for East Florida. 

Thoughts?
Logged
Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: September 05, 2012, 11:16:32 pm »
Ignore

Goals of the Map of the New South

1.   Create 5 African-American majority or plurality states, based on 1860 slavery census numbers. This was done in Northeast North Carolina/ Southeast Virginia, Eastern Georgia/ a majority of South Carolina, Northern Florida/Southwestern Georgia, Central Alabama/Western Georgia, Mississippi River Delta consisting of counties from Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee, and lastly Eastern Texas.
2.   Create 2 Pro-Union Appalachian states loosely based on the county votes for secession. This was done in Western North Carolina/Eastern Tennessee and Northern Alabama, Northern Georgia and Western South Carolina.
3.   Reward the Border States and territories that remained loyal to the Union. This including expanding Maryland, Washington DC and West Virginia into Virginia, expanding Kentucky along the Mississippi into Tennessee, expanding Missouri into Northern Arkansas and Indian Territory/Oklahoma into the Texas Panhandle.
4.   Divide Texas into 3.  A plurality African-American state in East Texas, a Central Texas state and returning the low populated Western/Southern Texas back to a territory.
5.   The remaining areas 6 areas will become overly majority white. Also when making the map I wanted to restrict their access to the Mississippi River.
6.   Lastly I was thinking about the renaming of the States. The African-American, Pro-Union and Border States states would be able to name their states as they wish. The 6 Rebel States would have their names chosen by the Federal Government. Some Ideas would be Lincoln for the Central North Carolina/Central Virginia state, Sherman for what’s left of Georgia, Johnson for Eastern Mississippi/Western Tennessee, Grant for Southern Arkansas/Western Louisiana, Houston for Central Texas, Rio Grande for the new Southern/Western Texas Territory, Farragut for West Florida and Seward for East Florida. 

Thoughts?

This is soo perfect for so meny reason! I love the naming ideas and logic in which these states were created I'm 99% certain I'll be able to incorporate this and think you did a GREAT JOB this map is nearly perfect! I agree with the names you mentioned as well as several others..... this could really work out nice! Smiley
Logged
Gass3268
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4200
United States


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: September 06, 2012, 04:01:03 pm »
Ignore

Goals of the Map of the New South

1.   Create 5 African-American majority or plurality states, based on 1860 slavery census numbers. This was done in Northeast North Carolina/ Southeast Virginia, Eastern Georgia/ a majority of South Carolina, Northern Florida/Southwestern Georgia, Central Alabama/Western Georgia, Mississippi River Delta consisting of counties from Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee, and lastly Eastern Texas.
2.   Create 2 Pro-Union Appalachian states loosely based on the county votes for secession. This was done in Western North Carolina/Eastern Tennessee and Northern Alabama, Northern Georgia and Western South Carolina.
3.   Reward the Border States and territories that remained loyal to the Union. This including expanding Maryland, Washington DC and West Virginia into Virginia, expanding Kentucky along the Mississippi into Tennessee, expanding Missouri into Northern Arkansas and Indian Territory/Oklahoma into the Texas Panhandle.
4.   Divide Texas into 3.  A plurality African-American state in East Texas, a Central Texas state and returning the low populated Western/Southern Texas back to a territory.
5.   The remaining areas 6 areas will become overly majority white. Also when making the map I wanted to restrict their access to the Mississippi River.
6.   Lastly I was thinking about the renaming of the States. The African-American, Pro-Union and Border States states would be able to name their states as they wish. The 6 Rebel States would have their names chosen by the Federal Government. Some Ideas would be Lincoln for the Central North Carolina/Central Virginia state, Sherman for what’s left of Georgia, Johnson for Eastern Mississippi/Western Tennessee, Grant for Southern Arkansas/Western Louisiana, Houston for Central Texas, Rio Grande for the new Southern/Western Texas Territory, Farragut for West Florida and Seward for East Florida. 

Thoughts?

This is soo perfect for so meny reason! I love the naming ideas and logic in which these states were created I'm 99% certain I'll be able to incorporate this and think you did a GREAT JOB this map is nearly perfect! I agree with the names you mentioned as well as several others..... this could really work out nice! Smiley

Glad you like it, it was fun to make!
Logged
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: September 06, 2012, 07:10:22 pm »
Ignore

Gass, that's awesome. However, making maps will be a problem. Would you mind attempting to merge real 'Murica with this? It's possible in paint. I don't think I'd have the skill to do it, but I suppose I could copy a county map, go along those borders you have, then erase all other county borders.
Logged

Gass3268
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4200
United States


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: September 06, 2012, 08:36:56 pm »
Ignore

Gass, that's awesome. However, making maps will be a problem. Would you mind attempting to merge real 'Murica with this? It's possible in paint. I don't think I'd have the skill to do it, but I suppose I could copy a county map, go along those borders you have, then erase all other county borders.

I apologize, but I don't know what exactly you are asking me to do.
Logged
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: September 06, 2012, 08:57:00 pm »
Ignore

Gass, that's awesome. However, making maps will be a problem. Would you mind attempting to merge real 'Murica with this? It's possible in paint. I don't think I'd have the skill to do it, but I suppose I could copy a county map, go along those borders you have, then erase all other county borders.

I apologize, but I don't know what exactly you are asking me to do.

Eh, on the weekend I'll make the map and show you.
Logged

Gass3268
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4200
United States


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: September 06, 2012, 09:06:47 pm »
Ignore

Gass, that's awesome. However, making maps will be a problem. Would you mind attempting to merge real 'Murica with this? It's possible in paint. I don't think I'd have the skill to do it, but I suppose I could copy a county map, go along those borders you have, then erase all other county borders.

I apologize, but I don't know what exactly you are asking me to do.

Eh, on the weekend I'll make the map and show you.

Ok, sounds good
Logged
Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: September 06, 2012, 11:48:28 pm »
Ignore

1865 Radical Republican Special National Convention Part 2

By the time the second round of voting was called to order there was a vague sense of uneasiness in the Party. Many were unsure who would be nominee and the party formed by a party's division seemed to be facing another division. There were whispers of a surprise nomination of Stanton but the President completely denied interest citing his restlessness with the job. So on Tuesday morning a second round of voting began when Sumner endorsed Colfax in a very powerful speech citing his as "our only light in this time of darkness" while Wade was more gruff and endorsed Stevens calling him his brother. Fremont however garnered most of Wade's support as people viewed him as both a pillar for the Party and a veteran. This led to him taking second over Stevens deeply creating a rift in the party.

The 2nd Ballot

Colfax 171 37%
Fremont 154 33%
Stevens 140 30%

Total- 465 Delegates
233 needed for majority

A fourth and fifth ballot delivered nearly the same results. Stevens grew very disgruntled following the 5th and stormed out of the hall to a pub just a block away. Enraged by his actions his delegates began leaving him in droves calling a retreat from the hall cowardly. Colfax was largely successful in winning their support by blaming Fremont for Stevens crumbling position. By the time Stevens returned to the hall he was quietly informed he would not be the nominee. The sixth ballot delivered the result the party was waiting for-

The 6th Ballot
Schuyler Colfax 291 63%
John Fremont 174 37%

Total- 465 Delegates
233 needed for majority

Fremont humbly accepted his defeat and Colfax then recommend Sumner for the Vice Presidential nominee. He was chosen with all of the delegates, unanimously. As the Convention concluded it appeared the Radical's had finally united just in time for the Lincolnian Convention.

 
Logged
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: September 07, 2012, 05:19:39 pm »
Ignore

Given Sumner's history, it's no surprise he became a Radical Republican. He had a very significant bone to pick with the slave south. Interesting. Might actually like to see how a Sumner presidency would go. Can't wait for the Dems and the Lincolnians.
Logged

Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: September 07, 2012, 11:51:57 pm »
Ignore

Updating tonight, hopefully the whole Lincolnian Convention as I will likely need to take a day or two off.
Logged
Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: September 08, 2012, 12:14:01 am »
Ignore

1865 Lincolnian Special National Convention
The Lincolnians opened their convention with a large feeling of momentum. Several prominent Democrats were joining their ranks on almost a daily basis due to an ideologicl similarity between the 2 groups. The party was heavily favored among Conservatives and Border State inhabitants and looked as though it could win the election. However, the Radicals controlled the Government and that worried the Lincolnians. The day started normal and calm however the crowd grew angry when President Seward showed up onstage and began speaking some cheered while others jeered and it was clearly obvious the man was liked by some in the party and despised by others. His speech at this one, unlike his a the Radical Convention, was short and primarily consisted of him saying how he stood in line with the Lincolnians on several issues while avoiding his differences with the party. He made no endorsement and after his briskm speech ended voting began. It was certainly unclear which of the 4 candidates would win as none garnered much enthusiasm. However voting quickly showed who the winner was and unlike the Radicals the Lincolnians had managed to find their winner in just one ballot. That man was William Alexander Richardson, an Illinois denizen his similarities in experience were close o those of Lincoln and was probably what drew delegates to him. Not to mention the fact he had recently converted parties and was one of the people the Lincolnians believed could bring in the Unaffiliated Democrat vote.

1st Ballot

William Alexander Richardson 116 60%
James Harlan 45 23%
Thomas Hendricks 29 15%
Samuel Pomeroy 5 2%

195 Delegates
98 needed for majority

For his Vice Presidential nominee Pomeroy was chosen as he was a Kansas citizen and was the least influential of Richardson's opponents.
Logged
Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: September 11, 2012, 12:28:40 am »
Ignore

1865 Democratic Special National Convention


By 1865 the Democratic Party was dying. Many were leaving their ranks for the Lincolnians as they viewed the Democratic Party too tied to the South. Even their congressional members refused to be called Democrats styling a new name: "Unaffiliated Democrats" which made it sound as though there was a lack of party leadership. As the convention convened in Trenton, New Jersey there were no announced candidates. Most of the delegates were undecided if they'd support anyone and it appeared as though there was a likely chance they'd make an effort to reach out to the Lincolnians on the topic of reunification as an even newer party. On the convention floor there was even talk of nominating Richardson to show solidarity, however, James A. McDougall (a senator of California) announced he would carry the party's banner and won with universal support as the party needed a new leader and most of theirs were from the South.

McDougall however became a very high maintenance candidate and became viewed as a spoiler for the Lincolnians chances. Several scandals involving alcohol surfaced before the end of the Convention and people began to leave the Democratic Party out of embarrassment. As the Convention closed a VP-less McDougall essentially ended his campaign and it was said by Radicals and Lincolnians alike that "a mere drunk tore down what remained of Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, and Jackson." Although looking back this wasn't the primary reason it certainly was a contributing factor to the Party's 1865 demise as July came to a close.
Logged
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: September 11, 2012, 06:27:19 pm »
Ignore

Can't wait for the GE! (And Gass, when I have a free weekend, I'll try to put the map together)
Logged

Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: September 11, 2012, 10:25:07 pm »
Ignore

As Summer waned the campaign grew more intense. The Radicals in Congress began putting forward new issues such as Gerrymandering the Southern States and Federal appointed legislatures. These were very hot issues with both parties on the complete opposite of the spectrum from one another. Radicals in favor and Lincolnians against. Ultimately further debating was put off to after the inauguration as both sides viewed themselves likely to benefit from it.


Stanton grew tired of the Partisan rhetoric and took a vacation away from Washington for the month of September. He worked from an office in the Maryland countryside where he began overseeing Reconstruction. The South was in ruins in more ways than one. The "Yankees" had ruined the region while taking it but they ruined it again following Lincoln's assassination with murders, drunken rampages, and scorched earth campaigns against the southern citizens. Now, the leaderless region was forced to unite with their sworn enemies which was a prospect few Southerners looked forward to.

The election began quickly approaching and for one of the first times people would know the results the day after due to advancements such as the telegraph. Both sides worked to win every vote. The Radicals held their anchor region as the Northeast while the Lincolnians looked toward the border states. This election truly tested the nation's new view on the party system following great numbers of disagreements.

Eventually October too soon passed and election day was already upon the nation. Realizing the turning point in history both sides hunkered down and began voting for either the Richardson or Colfax views for the future of the divided nation......
« Last Edit: September 12, 2012, 09:38:12 pm by Governor Spamage »Logged
Gass3268
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4200
United States


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: September 11, 2012, 10:39:25 pm »
Ignore

I'm guessing the Midwest is the swing region?
Logged
Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: September 11, 2012, 11:00:15 pm »
Ignore

I'm guessing the Midwest is the swing region?

Essentially yes, the main swing states are Iowa, Ohio, Kansas, New Jesrey...... there might be a few surprises though Wink
Logged
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: September 12, 2012, 04:31:32 pm »
Ignore

It's spelled "rhetoric" not "redderick". Tongue
Logged

Spamage
spamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1864
United States


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: September 12, 2012, 09:37:26 pm »
Ignore

It's spelled "rhetoric" not "redderick". Tongue

Oops I typed that after waking up from a nap Tongue
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines