Nice try at eliding, evading, and spinning the issues. Missourians did not prefer the Wide-Awakes and Lincoln to the legitimate State government.
In the 1860 election, Lincoln logged only 10% of the popular vote.
Breckinridge got 19% (almost twice as many as Lincoln), and Bell got 35%. The two Southern candidates combined for 54% of the popular vote.
Stephen Douglas of Illinois got about 350 more votes than Bell, at 35% and a fraction, and carried Missouri's nine electoral votes.
But combining the two Illinois candidates' votes, you're only at 45% -- and Douglas's "Northern" candidacy was far different from Lincoln's. Douglas had no plans to fall upon the South and occupy or destroy it, and everyone understood that. John Bell's Constitutional Union Party, favored by the big planters in the South, stood for the South's remaining in the Union -- but he was nobody's Abolitionist and as far from a South-basher as you could get.
No, you don't get this point. You're wrong.
According to the state convention they did.
In the 1860 election, Lincoln logged only 10% of the popular vote.
ROTFMLAO!!!!! Lincoln placed third in the vote tally in Delaware and lost New Jersey to Douglas by four points. Next thing you know you'll be trying to convince us that those states really wanted to secede, too.