Confederate Presidential Elections: 1867 - Page 2 - Historum

**tjadams** · June 15th, 2012, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bil73

I would be willing to bet Lee would do a better job and not have a corrupt administration like Grant. Giving that Lee seemed to have high moral standards

True, Lee's integrity has never been called into question. And while
I"m no Grant boot licker, I cannot fully condemn him for the poor
actions of some of his appointees while he was in office.

**Rongo** · June 15th, 2012, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeisSaul

Considering Lee and Stephens were both anti-secessionist, could a Lee Presidency have translated into a centralization government?

Secession had nothing to do with the centralization of government. The structure of the CS government was just as centralized as the structure of the US government, and the Davis Administration was just as centralized as the Lincoln Administration.

**Viperlord** · June 15th, 2012, 06:09 PM

Okay, not to poke holes here, but in all seriousness, Lee never would have run for office and Yancy was dead, so that makes two of these tickets non-functional from the start.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bil73

Giving that Lee seemed to have high moral standards

Odd thing to say given that you think he would have excelled at the head of one of the most morally bankrupt states of the 20th century (Even Russia had abolished serfdom!). I seriously cannot wrap my head around the massive doublethink contained within your post. Well done, I salute you.

Quote:

Considering Lee and Stephens were both anti-secessionist, could a Lee Presidency have translated into a centralization government?

What would have been left for them to centralize after Davis was through?

WeisSaul · June 15th, 2012, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viperlord

What would have been left for them to centralize after Davis was through?

I figured without the Yankee threat the need for centralization and increased calls of secessionist sentiment would have naturally forced some decentralization.

So this thread appears to have had more than a few flaws from the beginning. Any better ideas for two tickets?

**Rongo** · June 15th, 2012, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeisSaul

So this thread appears to have had more than a few flaws from the beginning. Any better ideas for two tickets?

I think Breckenridge and Cobb are excellent choices to head two tickets. Cobb from the Deep South, and Breckenridge from the "new North". I think that's likely to be where the new divisions would form in government. As for VP, who cares?

**tjadams** · June 15th, 2012, 07:58 PM

Don't forget, Cobb didn't want to be president of the Confederacy in the early
days of its formation. I don't see him wanting the reigns later either. I see him
comfortably ensconced in his law practice.

WeisSaul · June 16th, 2012, 05:53 AM

So Lee, Stephens, and Breckenridge?

**Rongo** · June 16th, 2012, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeisSaul

So Lee, Stephens, and Breckenridge?

I agree with Viperlord that Lee would have been very unlikely to run. I'm sure there would have been a lot of pressure on him to, and if he did he would be a shoo-in to win, but he was completely apolitical.

I also think that slate is too moderate. There needs to be more of a fire-eater in the line-up. Perhaps Robert Toombs from Georgia? He did run the first time around and was considered by many a favorite, but a drunken binge a couple days before the convention put an end to that.

WeisSaul · June 16th, 2012, 06:25 PM

So:
Stephens (Constitutional Union)
Breckinridge (Democratic)
Toombs (Whig)