1860 election

Discussion in 'History Forum' started by Salty, May 5, 2015.

  1. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,093
    Likes Received:
    218
    Results of the 1860 election

    Candidate..............votes...........States.....EC
    Lincoln .........(R)....1,865,908......18.......180
    Breckinridge (SD)..... 848,019......11.........72
    Bell ...........(CU)...... 590,901........3.........39
    Douglas .......(D)....1,380,202........1.........12

    Now if the Democrats had been united -and won the election; would there have been war in 1861?
     
  2. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,093
    Likes Received:
    218
    Thought I would bump this and see if anyone wants to consider an answer

    This chart give some good insight.

    15 States/commonwealths gave Lincoln the EC with more than 50% of the Vote
    Nearly 100 EC votes Lincoln won was with less than 53% of the popular vote.

    Three won by Lincoln were less than a majority of the votes.
     
  3. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    44
    ...three states with just a handful of electoral votes each. Even without those, the Republican still won a majority of the electors.


    Not true.
     
  4. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,093
    Likes Received:
    218
    The point being is that if the Dems had one unified Democrat - it could have altered the election.

    Not saying it would have happened - but there might have been a possibility.


    then how much off was I?
     
  5. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    44
    Nah, just wishful thinking on your part.
     
  6. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,093
    Likes Received:
    218
    Not wishful thinking - just a matter of how the splinted Democrat party may have changed history.
     
  7. plain_n_simple

    plain_n_simple
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,887
    Likes Received:
    5
    The kettle had been brewing for at least the 20 years prior to the 1860 election. A reckoning was inevitable. And more importantly, it is the Lord who builds up the kings and kingdoms of this world, and tears them down. The purpose was to prune us as a nation that is in covenant with God. We got pruned, but the general mindset in the North and South repented from slavery, but not racism. Many Union soldiers wished blacks free, but did not want to live with or around them. Hatred prevailed. Further proof is found even as late as WW2, where blacks would not fight, yet it is proven they are the greatest athletically, potential fighting machines wasted. The birth of suburbs is a partial proof also. It goes on and on, so now we are paying for it.
     
  8. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,189
    Likes Received:
    611
    I don't see how. The Dem. candidates were split amongst pro-secessionists (Breckenridge) and non-secessionist unionists (Douglas).
     
  9. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,093
    Likes Received:
    218
    Thus that is what happens when there is no unity - and the results of third parties.

    Look at 1992 - Did Perot elect Clinton over Bush?
     
  10. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    We should have 4 or 5 parties or more in this country and not allow one or two parties control the electoral process.
     
  11. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,189
    Likes Received:
    611
    Since secession was such a defining, divisive issue if there had been a lone Democrat candidate Lincoln still would have won. Secessionists would not have voted for Douglas, and Unionist Democrats would not have voted for Breckenridge.
     
  12. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,093
    Likes Received:
    218
    Possibly - however in this day and age very few R's would ever vote for a D, and very few D's would ever vote for a R.
    Often it is those in the middle of the political spectrum who decide on the POTUS
     
  13. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,928
    Likes Received:
    369
    My wife's family will always vote democrat. They are for small government, even smaller federal government, pro state government, they are all hunters, they all support the NRA and are opposed to any type of gun control, they are opposed to abortion, they are opposed to SSM, they are opposed to illegal immigration (heck....now days they are opposed to legal immigration as well). But they always vote democrat because they are Democrats.. I'll be honest. I cannot understand how a Christian can be a Democrat. It does not make sense (and I can only chalk it up to stupidity....like my family). But I have to admit, I sometimes wonder how one can be a Republican as well.
     
    #13 JonC, Jul 19, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 19, 2015
  14. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    9,630
    Likes Received:
    310
    I'm guessing your wife's kin are rural in background. I'd also guess quite a few went through the Great Depression. If they fit that demographic, I'd hazard they are FDR Democrats. The New Deal kept many families from starvation and gave many others hope for the future. To them the Republicans will always be the party of Herbert Hoover and Henry Ford.
     
  15. Lewis

    Lewis
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2013
    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    50
    Not to be nit-picky, but Breckenridge was not pro-secession at that point. Although he became a Confederate officer when it came down to war.
    LINK
     
  16. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,928
    Likes Received:
    369

    Yep. I think they are just starting to see things differently,.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  17. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,189
    Likes Received:
    611
    You are correct. I really should look some of this stuff up instead of relying on my memory. Thanks for posting that.
     
  18. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,093
    Likes Received:
    218
    don't worry, you are not the only one....
     
  19. Lewis

    Lewis
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2013
    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    50
    You are welcome ITL.
     
  20. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Yes!!!!!!!!!!
     

Share This Page

Loading...