They should have, but they could not because he opposed the Lecompton farce that was so popular in the South.
And, of course, it had nothing to do with economics.
Between 1850-1860 the price of cotton had run up to previously undreamed-of levels and Southern GDP per capita had increased 75% in the same period. The years before the war were one long economic boom for the South.
If there was any economic cause to the Civil War, it would have been that the South was wading in such a deep pool of cash that they believed they really could take on a section that had three times their white population.
Do you have a source to back that 'fact' up?
And then Douglas was of no use to them. The rebs would have dropped Democratic stalwart Douglas for any high tariff, big government Whig had that man gone for slavery everywhere. I suspect that if Douglas had somehow been elected there would have still been a secession eventually. Once the slave interest got their heart set on the territories, a conflict was inevitable whether the rebs were in or out of the Union.
If there was any economic cause to the Civil War, it would have been that the South was wading in such a deep pool of cash that they believed they really could take on a section that had three times their white population.
The 1850s had spoiled them, emboldened them and finally infuriated them as the belated reaction from the nation threatened their dreams of a slavery utopia just when it seemed in their grasp.