genyodectes
Warrant Officer
I'm just a Ceratosaur trying to make his way in Alternate History
Posts: 226 
Likes: 119
|
Post by genyodectes on Aug 10, 2019 1:14:18 GMT
made an 1852 Presidential Election Infobox from a thread discussing vanderbilt becoming potus. Some of the map I disagreed, so I changed soem things  Map for the curious :  what does everyone think? (Yes, I made a spreadsheet for this as well) |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Aug 10, 2019 13:34:51 GMT
genyodectes , The map colours, yellow, red and green don't match with the colours under the candidates, i.e. purple, blue and a slightly different tint of yellow - at least to my eyes. Would I by right in assuming the yellow on the map, including most of the north and upper south as well as Texas and California are for Vanderbilt, red for Buchanan and the green for Scott? That would fit with the electoral votes and number of states.
Not sure how practical such a scenario would be but would make for a different world. Assuming that he would divert from making money hand over fist to actually run for political office. Looking at his Wiki entry virtually all his experience is with water transport, including local ferries and shipping via the isthmus for miners going to California for the gold rush. Seems he was interested in a canal through Nicaragua so if he became president he might push for that, although that could mean either clashes or cooperation with Britain. - Looking at the entry for the Mosquito coast kingdom, see Mosquito_Coast_Second_British_protectorate_and_American_opposition there were clashes including a case of a British warship firing on a US steamer for not paying port tolls with a certain C Vanderbilt as a passenger. This was in Nov 48 so might be a trigger for both him to be hostile to Britain and look for a political career? There were a number of clashes in the early 1850's between locals and US citizens and Britain was distracted by the Crimean War so unable/unwilling to clash with the US.
Also noted I was wrong and he was already investing in controlling railways by the mid 1840's.
Interesting scenario along with the possibility of a nasty clash between the US and Britain. 
Steve
|
|
genyodectes
Warrant Officer
I'm just a Ceratosaur trying to make his way in Alternate History
Posts: 226
Likes: 119
|
Post by genyodectes on Aug 10, 2019 13:50:29 GMT
genyodectes , The map colours, yellow, red and green don't match with the colours under the candidates, i.e. purple, blue and a slightly different tint of yellow - at least to my eyes. Would I by right in assuming the yellow on the map, including most of the north and upper south as well as Texas and California are for Vanderbilt, red for Buchanan and the green for Scott? That would fit with the electoral votes and number of states.
Not sure how practical such a scenario would be but would make for a different world. Assuming that he would divert from making money hand over fist to actually run for political office. Looking at his Wiki entry virtually all his experience is with water transport, including local ferries and shipping via the isthmus for miners going to California for the gold rush. Seems he was interested in a canal through Nicaragua so if he became president he might push for that, although that could mean either clashes or cooperation with Britain. - Looking at the entry for the Mosquito coast kingdom, see Mosquito_Coast_Second_British_protectorate_and_American_opposition there were clashes including a case of a British warship firing on a US steamer for not paying port tolls with a certain C Vanderbilt as a passenger. This was in Nov 48 so might be a trigger for both him to be hostile to Britain and look for a political career? There were a number of clashes in the early 1850's between locals and US citizens and Britain was distracted by the Crimean War so unable/unwilling to clash with the US.
Also noted I was wrong and he was already investing in controlling railways by the mid 1840's.
Interesting scenario along with the possibility of a nasty clash between the US and Britain.
Steve
You are correct for the map colors. Dave Leip's Election Atlas doesn't have purple as a color so I improvised. Another thing to note about Nicaragua : William Walker took control of the country in 1856 after having control of Lower/Beja California. He only lost power in that Country due to supporting Carnegie (I think?) instead of Vanderbilt, thus bringing vanderbilt to promptly encourage CR to invade and overthrow him. With Vanderbilt as President, it's likely Beja and Nicaraugua is annexed by the US in the 1850s as that was Walker's intent for going there. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Aug 10, 2019 14:28:56 GMT
genyodectes , The map colours, yellow, red and green don't match with the colours under the candidates, i.e. purple, blue and a slightly different tint of yellow - at least to my eyes. Would I by right in assuming the yellow on the map, including most of the north and upper south as well as Texas and California are for Vanderbilt, red for Buchanan and the green for Scott? That would fit with the electoral votes and number of states.
Not sure how practical such a scenario would be but would make for a different world. Assuming that he would divert from making money hand over fist to actually run for political office. Looking at his Wiki entry virtually all his experience is with water transport, including local ferries and shipping via the isthmus for miners going to California for the gold rush. Seems he was interested in a canal through Nicaragua so if he became president he might push for that, although that could mean either clashes or cooperation with Britain. - Looking at the entry for the Mosquito coast kingdom, see Mosquito_Coast_Second_British_protectorate_and_American_opposition there were clashes including a case of a British warship firing on a US steamer for not paying port tolls with a certain C Vanderbilt as a passenger. This was in Nov 48 so might be a trigger for both him to be hostile to Britain and look for a political career? There were a number of clashes in the early 1850's between locals and US citizens and Britain was distracted by the Crimean War so unable/unwilling to clash with the US.
Also noted I was wrong and he was already investing in controlling railways by the mid 1840's.
Interesting scenario along with the possibility of a nasty clash between the US and Britain.
Steve
You are correct for the map colors. Dave Leip's Election Atlas doesn't have purple as a color so I improvised. Another thing to note about Nicaragua : William Walker took control of the country in 1856 after having control of Lower/Beja California. He only lost power in that Country due to supporting Carnegie (I think?) instead of Vanderbilt, thus bringing vanderbilt to promptly encourage CR to invade and overthrow him. With Vanderbilt as President, it's likely Beja and Nicaraugua is annexed by the US in the 1850s as that was Walker's intent for going there.
Well he can try but imposing slavery there is going to be difficult both economically and politically. Also the treaty agreement between Britain and the US barred either from annexing territory or establishing protectorates so such a move would be a clear breach of that. You could see Britain giving a lot of support to locals opposing Walker's coup attempt. There is some war weariness after the Crimean war and the Indian Mutiny but also a lot has been learnt. Also the expansion of slavery, which IIRC was Walker's aim, would be a red flag to Britain, as well as to parts of the US.
|
|
genyodectes
Warrant Officer
I'm just a Ceratosaur trying to make his way in Alternate History
Posts: 226
Likes: 119
|
Post by genyodectes on Aug 10, 2019 14:40:46 GMT
You are correct for the map colors. Dave Leip's Election Atlas doesn't have purple as a color so I improvised. Another thing to note about Nicaragua : William Walker took control of the country in 1856 after having control of Lower/Beja California. He only lost power in that Country due to supporting Carnegie (I think?) instead of Vanderbilt, thus bringing vanderbilt to promptly encourage CR to invade and overthrow him. With Vanderbilt as President, it's likely Beja and Nicaraugua is annexed by the US in the 1850s as that was Walker's intent for going there.
Well he can try but imposing slavery there is going to be difficult both economically and politically. Also the treaty agreement between Britain and the US barred either from annexing territory or establishing protectorates so such a move would be a clear breach of that. You could see Britain giving a lot of support to locals opposing Walker's coup attempt. There is some war weariness after the Crimean war and the Indian Mutiny but also a lot has been learnt. Also the expansion of slavery, which IIRC was Walker's aim, would be a red flag to Britain, as well as to parts of the US.
Britain didn't care much for American affairs at the time (If they had, they would've intervened in the M-A War) They were much more interested in stabilizing their situation in Europe (Against a resurging France) and conquering Africa, India, Australia, and China. America had no interest in war with the UK either (The only way such a war could happen was if the US wanted Canada, which they had given up on at this time). And yes, there would be abolitionists against this move, but from the Missouri Compromise to Kansas-Nebraska, the majority opinion was compromise and balance. Balance the Slave States with the Free States. It wasn't until Bleeding Kansas become really bad did the nation go for either complete abolition or containment, tough there were still a great many who believed in Balance. in 1852, there were 15 slave states to 16 free states. Getting Nicaragua as a slave state would make it an even 16-16 and with Minnesota and Beja, it would be an even 17-17. Vanderbilt would be for balance and compromise and would prevent the admittance of another free state until a slave state could balance it out, which would likely be Cuba in this case (Again, no one in Europe gave much of a care about Spain's remnant empire, Iberia was p much left behind in the victorian age), making it an even 18-18. Of course, however, the compromise wouldn't last forever and with the addition of Kansas and more of the West and Plains being against Slavery rather than for it, the South would need to make the choice for rebellion or not. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Aug 10, 2019 18:48:24 GMT
Well he can try but imposing slavery there is going to be difficult both economically and politically. Also the treaty agreement between Britain and the US barred either from annexing territory or establishing protectorates so such a move would be a clear breach of that. You could see Britain giving a lot of support to locals opposing Walker's coup attempt. There is some war weariness after the Crimean war and the Indian Mutiny but also a lot has been learnt. Also the expansion of slavery, which IIRC was Walker's aim, would be a red flag to Britain, as well as to parts of the US.
Britain didn't care much for American affairs at the time (If they had, they would've intervened in the M-A War) They were much more interested in stabilizing their situation in Europe (Against a resurging France) and conquering Africa, India, Australia, and China. America had no interest in war with the UK either (The only way such a war could happen was if the US wanted Canada, which they had given up on at this time). And yes, there would be abolitionists against this move, but from the Missouri Compromise to Kansas-Nebraska, the majority opinion was compromise and balance. Balance the Slave States with the Free States. It wasn't until Bleeding Kansas become really bad did the nation go for either complete abolition or containment, tough there were still a great many who believed in Balance. in 1852, there were 15 slave states to 16 free states. Getting Nicaragua as a slave state would make it an even 16-16 and with Minnesota and Beja, it would be an even 17-17. Vanderbilt would be for balance and compromise and would prevent the admittance of another free state until a slave state could balance it out, which would likely be Cuba in this case (Again, no one in Europe gave much of a care about Spain's remnant empire, Iberia was p much left behind in the victorian age), making it an even 18-18. Of course, however, the compromise wouldn't last forever and with the addition of Kansas and more of the West and Plains being against Slavery rather than for it, the South would need to make the choice for rebellion or not.
I think you underestimate the hostility towards the expansion of both the US into Central America and of slavery being pressed into that region. The latter by both locals and the UK. If Vanderbilt gained the Presidency and made further colonial expansions during the Crimean War, which Britain is preoccupied he might get away with it for the moment but it will raise concerns both in the US NE about the expansion of slavery and in the UK about that and the breach of the recent treaty on interests in the region.
At this point although there is some concern about France, given Napoleon III rather erratic character and occasional French naval programmes relations were generally good and the two nations had close economic links as well as being allied during the Crimean War. It was only after the fall of the 3rd empire and then a rather odd French response to events in Egypt in ~1882 that relations cooled significantly.
|
|
