Board Thread:New on Alternative History/@comment-72.185.4.15-20130303025444/@comment-32656-20141214120456

Imo, that "siege" mentality existed long before Brown tried that raid.

Considering exactly how and why the Democrats fractured, very unlikely that they back a joint candidate.

Seward did not have the support to win the nomination, and would be even less likely to get it without Harper's Ferry.

No "easy win." Lincoln, imo, still likely comes out on top.

North would only secede if the election was blatantly stolen - i.e. something like Breckinridge is given the spot by the house, despite Lincoln holding a clear plurality of the EVs.

He was not neutral, imo. He advocated in favor of the Confederacy from the start, and was against the neutral position adopted by Kentucky until it was clear that it had majority support in its legislature.

His views on slavery was that if the state chose to allow it, then in could exist there. True, he doesn't seem to have liked the idea too much, but he thought at the same time that it was their right. Think of it as sort of being like Lee's opinion on the matter.