Posted on 09/13/2025 1:03:13 PM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
To ponder such a scenario is to delve into the realm of historical conjecture. However, by examining the political landscape of the time and Lincoln's own aspirations, it is possible to glean insight into what might have transpired had his life not been cut short by events.
Firstly, it's essential to consider Lincoln's vision for post-Civil War America. He was deeply committed to the principles of reconciliation and reconstruction, aiming to heal the nation's wounds and forge a path towards unity. In the aftermath of the Civil War, Lincoln sought to reintegrate the Southern states into the Union with leniency and compassion, prioritizing national healing over punitive measures.
Had Lincoln survived, it's plausible that his approach to reconstruction would have been markedly different from that of his successor, Andrew Johnson. Lincoln's conciliatory stance toward the South may have led to a smoother and more inclusive reconstruction process, potentially mitigating some of the deep-seated animosities that lingered in the aftermath of the war and potentially still do today.
Moreover, Lincoln's leadership style and political acumen would likely have played a pivotal role in shaping the post-Civil War era. His ability to navigate complex political terrain and build consensus across ideological divides could have paved the way for a more stable and harmonious transition from war to peace.
One of the most intriguing questions surrounding a hypothetical continuation of Lincoln's presidency is its impact on the trajectory of race relations in America. As a staunch advocate for the abolition of slavery, Lincoln recognized the need for fundamental changes in the status of African Americans in society. While his Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 marked a significant step forward, Lincoln understood that true equality would require sustained effort and political will.
(Excerpt) Read more at historyisnowmagazine.com ...
And what if the had just been allowed to secede?
I remember reading somewhere that the issue of education for former slaves was important to him.
They’d probably have continued to practice slavery for a long, long time.
I don’t think it would have made any difference. Lincoln would have been lenient during Reconstruction, which would have resulted in all the former Democrats coming back into the government even sooner than they eventually did. The country was going to stay unreconstructed for over 100 years regardless of who was President.
They’d probably have continued to practice slavery for a long, long time.“
Maybe but l doubt it. It was quickly becoming untenable.
I once wasted about 15 minutes of my life trying to convince a leftidiot acquaintance of mine (not a friend) that Lincoln was a Republican. Showed him all kinds of links etc. He just would not believe it. This ladies and gents is the level of delusion we are up against.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=what+if+lincoln+wasn%27t+assassinated
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=what+if+kennedy+wasn%27t+assassinated
Absolutely. Andrew Johnson was pro-slavery and obstructed the Reconstruction efforts of the Republican-controlled Congress.
There are two now 45 year old work friends who had a wait, what?! moment when I also explained that Lincoln was a Republican.
I had a similar experience about 10 years ago. Leftwingers live in a make-believe world where inconvenient facts are to be ignored if it interferes with their worldview.
“It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren’t so”.
the irs took over the helms of slavery...
And it’s universal...
By 1866 with election that year, they had achieved enough support to impose their military and civil program on the defeated South. When it became known that Johnson wanted to fire Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton, they deliberately passed the Tenure of Office Act that banned the President from firing any Cabinet member without permission of Congress. The Radical Republicans saw Stanton as an ally in the Cabinet. Johnson, despite the passage of the Act, went ahead and fired Stanton, and replaced Stanton with General U.S. Grant. Johnson was impeached the following year, the main charge being his violation of the Tenure of Office Act. As we all know, he was acquitted in the Senate. The Tenure of Office Act was repealed partly in 1869 and entirely in 1887 and was also declared by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1926 to have been unconstitutional.
In my eyes, the Radical Republicans acted exactly like the Democrats do today. RATS will change the rules and laws to suit their immediate need. Then, when the rule or law they just put in place, comes back and bites one of them in the ass, they whine that the law isn't fair, and want to change it again.
Even if Lincoln had lived, it's likely the Radical Republicans, had they gained support in the 1866 election, would have fought him tooth and nail on his reconstruction plans, and it's anybody's guess as to how things would have turned out. Maybe the idiots would have impeached Lincoln to get their way. As usual, our government is its own worst enemy, and just like today, retaining power is the most important thing to the two parties, not what's good for the nation.
Lincoln’s assassination also had many international aspects as well.
Fearing a stronger United States (and revenge for their support of the Confederacy) only 18 months after the Union Victory, they created country of Canada out of several colonies, with the North American Act in Parliament.
France too supported the Confederacy, hoping for a weakened United States which would not challenge its plans to colonize Mexico.
Lincoln’s death served their purposes of a more divided and distracted United States.
Agree. Had Lincoln been able to finish his term he would have been remembered as a historic President but with a mixed record of accomplishment due to the opposition he would have faced. He would never have been elevated to being universally seen as one of the top 2 or 3 Presidents of all time and a champion of civil rights and liberty. The same is true of JFK, MLK Jr., Gandi, and other martyred political figures.
No!
Civil war was fought during the worldwide movement of abolition.
In 1888, Brazil, as the last country in the world, outlawed the slavery. Since then, there has been no place in the world where slavery is legal!
I would guess, around that time, South would outlaw slavery as well!
So slavery in the South would be legal for about 20 years longer.
Is 20 years long, long time? Your call.
I’m not so sure.
That’s beyond ignorance. That’s idiocy and as you put it, delusional.
They should probably be in a mental institution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.