But I respectfully disagree with the sometimes FR posted sentiment that the abolitionists (Republicans) were the ones responsible for making the federal government grow because of slavery. Blame first and foremost should be placed on the pro-slavery Dims who pushed the federal government into the slavery argument with the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act and the SCOTUS Dred Scott decision. Those 2 actions forced citizens in the Free States to abide by the pro-slavery Dims' will or face the wrath of US Marshalls and fines. That pushed the abolitionist Republicans into having to win the argument at the federal level (which they promised to do in the 1860 campaign, though Lincoln every now and then backpedaled on that).
That being said, after the Republicans won the 1860 election and would soon be able to put in abolitionist policies, should they have let the Confederate Dims break away from the Union and start their own country? I guess that's debatable.
"That being said, after the Republicans won the 1860 election and would soon be able to put in abolitionist policies, should they have let the Confederate Dims break away from the Union and start their own country?First of all, the only abolitionist policies Republicans advocated in 1860 involved US western territories, not Southern states.
I guess that's debatable."
Second, Republicans had nothing whatever to do with letting Southern Democrats break away from the Union and start their own country -- that was 100% the Doughfaced Democrat administration of Pres. James Buchanan.
What Republicans in Congress might have done in December 1860 is given in to Southern demands for "compromises" to persuade some Deep South states not to declare secession, especially Mississippi.
But this would have negated the whole Republican raison d'être and provided no guarantees against future Democrat threats of secession.
Regardless, by the time of Lincoln's inauguration, March 4, 1861, secession and Confederacy were already a fait accompli, and the only issue was whether there would be peace or war.
In his First Inaugural, Lincoln offered peace, but many Southerners called it a "Declaration of War" on the South, and increased their demands, threats & seizures by force of Federal properties.
One key property was Union Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor.
"And the war came".
So, many have argued that Republican Lincoln should have just submitted and given-in to whatever Southern Democrats demanded.
And actually, Lincoln himself was willing to cut a deal -- to give away Fort Sumter -- if that could guarantee no secession by Virginia.
But the deal could not be struck, and so Lincoln held his ground -- one of the few Republicans ever willing to stand up to radical Democrat demands.
Today we have an opportunity to elect another such Republican, and, hopefully, the results will not be quite as catastrophic as 1860's election.
But I doubt if Pres. Trump's success in 2024 will be 100% free of dire consequences from radical Democrats.
Political violence is always just under the surface with extremist Democrats.