Friday, September 23, 2016
RE DK POST PRESIDENT TRUMP?
Professor Kaiser mentions Lincoln's overwhelming electoral majority...
Here are the 4 presidential candidates vying for the office, the numbers for the popular votes, percentage of popular votes, and resulting number of electors for each candidate:
Lincoln, Republican: popular vote: 1,865,908, 39.8 % ; electoral vote: 180
Breckenridge, Southern Democrat: popular vote: 848,019, 18.1% ; electoral vote: 72
Bell, Constitutional Union/Whig: popular vote: 590,901, 12.6%; electoral vote: 39
Douglas, Northern Democrat: popular vote: 1, 380,202, 29.5%; electoral vote: 12
Here are the 4 presidential candidates vying for the office, the numbers for the popular votes, percentage of popular votes, and resulting number of electors for each candidate:
Lincoln, Republican: popular vote: 1,865,908, 39.8 % ; electoral vote: 180
Breckenridge, Southern Democrat: popular vote: 848,019, 18.1% ; electoral vote: 72
Bell, Constitutional Union/Whig: popular vote: 590,901, 12.6%; electoral vote: 39
Douglas, Northern Democrat: popular vote: 1, 380,202, 29.5%; electoral vote: 12
Here is why Professor Kaiser's statement is true, although Lincoln's percentage of the popular vote itself was less than 40%:
The Republican victory resulted from the concentration of votes in the free states (the North), which together controlled a majority of the presidential electors. Population increases in the free states had far exceeded those seen in the slave states for many years before the election of 1860, hence their dominance in the Electoral College.
Even his 3 opponents' electoral votes combined could not have defeated his sectional populational advantage.
Professor Kaiser mentioned that the right candidate won both in 1860 and in 1932.
Actually, I believe the right candidate in 1860 was Douglas, and the Civil War, and its aftermath, more or less proved that.
You may say, try to rationalize how thing went for the rest of history here, well, had Lincoln not been assasinated, things would have turned out very differently from then on.
Actually, that is emphatically not the case, either, as fervently as many well meaning Americans, white and black, would like to believe it. Why do I say that? How can that be true?
Well, if you look back at the history, after Lincoln's assassination, his successor, President Johnson closely followed and tried for several years to carry out Lincoln's intentions for reconciliation.
Those intentions were soundly defeated by a Congress run by radical Republicans.
It would have been this same Congress which would certainly have overridden Lincoln's plans as well, had he lived.
Professor Kaiser mentioned that the right candidate won both in 1860 and in 1932.
Actually, I believe the right candidate in 1860 was Douglas, and the Civil War, and its aftermath, more or less proved that.
You may say, try to rationalize how thing went for the rest of history here, well, had Lincoln not been assasinated, things would have turned out very differently from then on.
Actually, that is emphatically not the case, either, as fervently as many well meaning Americans, white and black, would like to believe it. Why do I say that? How can that be true?
Well, if you look back at the history, after Lincoln's assassination, his successor, President Johnson closely followed and tried for several years to carry out Lincoln's intentions for reconciliation.
Those intentions were soundly defeated by a Congress run by radical Republicans.
It would have been this same Congress which would certainly have overridden Lincoln's plans as well, had he lived.
No comments:
Post a Comment