Let's say Lincoln loses in November to a Democrat who supported their platform of peace with the Confederacy (i.e. not McClellan). However in this timeline, the war has happened like it historically did (Sherman took Atlanta, Grant is trying to take Petersburg, etc.). Can Lincoln defeat the Confederacy before the inauguration of his successor in March? If not, but the Union still achieves the successes they historically did by then (cutting off Lee and the Confederacy's last port in Wilmington) will Lincoln's successor still try to make peace with the Confederacy? Finally, if the Confederacy is still defeated, how will Lincoln's legacy and Reconstruction be affected? I understand Lincoln losing the election in this scenario is unrealistic, but that's why this is a hypothetical.
Hypothetical: Lincoln loses to a peace Democrat in 1864 but the Civil War up to this point hasn't changed
- Thread starter AbeLincoln1865
- Start date
Lincoln won 55% of the popular vote, and won the electoral college 212-21
How the heck are you going to overturn that with the war going the same way???
If a Copperhead were the Democratic candidate (which might have been possible, the party platform was for peace, even McClellan refused to support it), then Lincoln would probably have won with the support of even more WarDemocrats.
This is one of those What Ifs where you really need to figure out a PoD, because it's so unlikely that the change required will have lots of other effects, too.
How the heck are you going to overturn that with the war going the same way???
If a Copperhead were the Democratic candidate (which might have been possible, the party platform was for peace, even McClellan refused to support it), then Lincoln would probably have won with the support of even more WarDemocrats.
This is one of those What Ifs where you really need to figure out a PoD, because it's so unlikely that the change required will have lots of other effects, too.
As I already pointed out, this scenario is unlikely and only a hypothetical. If you want a PoD, I don't know, the Confederates capture St. Louis and the capital of Missouri during their raid into the state in the September of 1864.
Any Lincoln loss in 1864 is going to require butterflying away the fall of Atlanta. Without it, he's going to romp to re-election as he did IOTL.
Thomas1195
Banned
Assume that the war goes worse than expected and the Dems win. I mean, while most of the war is still fought on CSA lands and Union armies still occupies a not so insignificant part of them, the efforts to finish off the whole CSA bog down (like Vietnam for example). What if the Democrats sign a peace treaty that not just recognizes the Confederate but also hands back all Confederate territories occupied by the Union armies?
It would be difficult (to near impossible) for the war to end at or before March 1865 with a POD in November 1864. Simply put, without a negotiated surrender, the Union army has no way to overrun the last (relevant) pieces of Confederate soil. By March 1865, Sherman had marched through both Georgia and South Carolina and still had to march through North Carolina. And that is the case despite the minimal resistance offered by the rebels in the first two states. The Army of Tennessee's return to North Carolina meant that a fight was going to happen in North Carolina. Grant can't really finish off Lee because the freezing winter meant that the Army of the Potomac would not have the same mobility they had at the Appomattox Campaign.
Besides, given how obvious the end of the war seemed, I doubt that McClellan, who IOTL responded to the Democratic committee that he would not offer peace terms short of a reconstructed Union, would give the Confederates a white peace.
Besides, given how obvious the end of the war seemed, I doubt that McClellan, who IOTL responded to the Democratic committee that he would not offer peace terms short of a reconstructed Union, would give the Confederates a white peace.
No peace treaty with the CS could possibly be ratified by the heavily Republican Senate.
In theory, I suppose, a Democratic POTUS could simply order the Army to pull out of the seceded states, but such a move would condemn the Dems to a catastrophic defeat in the 1866 midterms and loss of the Presidency in 1868, so I can't really picture it.
The Union capture of Fort Fisher, which closed down the Confederacy's last port at Wilmington, happened on January 15th 1865. Lincoln's successor would be inaugurated on March 4th. If Lincoln orders Grant to launch an offensive without holding anything back, surely it would be possible for him to defeat Lee in 48 days with the latter now out of supply?
SwampTiger
Banned
The Radical Republican House AND Senate will impeach and remove the Peace Democratic President, and if needed Vice-President, upon inauguration!
If the Dems win the Presidency they may well control the HoR also.
However, a POTUS wHo tried to recognise the CS might be impeached by a coalition of Republicans and War Democrats.
Last edited:
In that era a newly elected Congress did not take office until the following December, so both houses are still Republican. Based on the OP, the CSA is still toast.
If we're talking about an attack in late January or early February, the likelihood of an Appomattox style surrender is low. Firstly, although Grant had two-to-one odds, experience showed that this was not good enough when you factor Lee's fortifications into the equation. He needed to stretch Lee's line even more before he could do so. During the final battle for Petersburg, eighteen regiments of Parke's IX Corps secured 500 yards of the first Confederate line and was contained by four Confederate brigades. The VI Corps, which was the corps that broke Lee's line, succeeded by massing 14,000 men in a complicated formation of columns and lines against a line of 2,800 Confederates that stretched about a mile.
Second, the harsh winter hindered any such offensive. Grant attempted a limited offensive on February 5-7 when there was a spell of good weather but quickly terminated the campaign after brief fighting and a severe storm of sleet and snow fell on the battlefield. Third, supposing that Grant succeeded in breaking through Lee's lines, he has only one (Gregg's) cavalry division to mount a pursuit. IOTL, one of the keys to capturing Lee's army was the ability of Sheridan's cavalry to interdict retreating Confederate forces and get ahead of them. Sheridan was still finishing off Jubal Early and would not succeed until early March.
Actually the new Congress took office on March 4, it is just that they did not meet in session until December, as the Congress met much less often as compared to now.
It seems way more likely that Lincoln could lose if the Atlanta campaign turns into a disaster. That's well within the realm of possibility, a matter of a few lucky dice rolls in certain engagements rather than something in ASB territory. But if Sherman's march to the sea goes OTL, no way does he lose.
Lee fleeing would be less important to Lincoln than capturing Richmond before his successor is inaugurated. How much ammunition did Lee have left after Wilmington was closed to shipping in January? Lee might not have enough to actually stop Grant from breaking through if the latter throws everything into the attack.
Are you seriously proposing to throw men until Lee ran out of bullets? The answer I'm pretty sure is Lee has enough. Throughout the final days of Petersburg and the Appomattox Campaign, Lee's army was lacking in food but not ammunition. In fact, the Rebels were able to refill their chests with fresh ammunition at Amelia Court House on April 5 and tossed aside older and excess ammunition.
If Lincoln's successor were to order all Union troops to leave the Confederacy, what happens next?