The Election of 1860
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 พ.ค. 2024
- Join this channel to support Civil War storytelling and to get perks:
/ @threadsfromthenationa...
The year was 1860. The nation was coming apart and yet, its political parties made plans to come together - to gather in convention despite deep-seated and festering sectional issues, each to nominate a candidate and approve platforms that, as it turned out, united regions but not a nation. That meant dark consequences, ensuring this country would reap a cataclysmic whirlwind.
With today’s polarization as a historical backdrop, this is the story of the most divisive presidential election in the history of this nation - the election of 1860.
Narrated by Fred Kiger
Produced by Dan Irving
Published by Third Wheel Media
We're looking for sponsors for this channel. If you're interested in learning more about this limited opportunity, email: info@thirdwheelmedia.com
____________________________________________________________________
Some Characters Mentioned In This Episode:
Stephen A. Douglas
William Lowndes Yancey
William Henry Seward
Richard J. Oglesby
John C. Breckinridge
John Bell
Can't wait! The narration keeps me coming back aswell as the great story telling. My wife who hated history growing up has even warmed up to the series for its storytelling even though she doesn't have any interest in the Civil war or the 19th century as a whole.
A good orator can keep history ALIVE!!
Bravo Fred! What an excellent présentation. Every 3 or 4 years, our Boy Scout troop travels to Gettysburg and they ask if I can come as a “guide”. The first thing I say when we start is “I will not give you dates & numbers, except for the ages of the soldiers & the terrible price both sides paid”. I didn’t know if I had their attention one year. We finished, as we always do, with “Pickett’s Charge”. As I finished my talk, boys between the ages 12 & 17 applauded. After, on the way back to camp, I broke down in tears.
My grandson, an Eagle Scout, would have loved to be on 1 of those trips. When he stayed over as a young child his bedtime stories were looking at my history book collection. He's been to Vicksburg, Lookout Mountain & Chickamauga. He goes to university in the NE so maybe 1 day he will visit Gettysburg.
I was struck by the parallels between 1860 and today.....nicely done....
Agreed,,1860-Slavery Rights,,,,2024 Abortion Rights,,,Democrats are pathetic!
I have a whole new respect for Stephen Douglas, it's much easier to try to police your opponents than it is to police your own.
I’m glad I found this channel! I love the narration and the style it has. Makes the long days as a truck drivers little more palatable.
Thank you Fred for this mesmerizing presentation. Your programs are the best for anything Civil War related. Once again thank you!
So informative. Our history is truly amazing. And if all of us don’t learn from our past, we will certainly repeat it.
This is really high quality. Thank you so much for your effort.
Stephen Douglas had huge negative role with the Kansas Nebrasca act, but he understood well his mistake to start the USA to the Civil War with bleeding Kansas. So he change his opinion for the whole USA idea. His role was huge to help Lincoln after his election to turn the Northern Democrat people to support Civil War. Douglas said to Lincoln he would have called 200 000 volounters instead of 75 000 after Fort Sumter.
Full of information. Great work.
Douglas in his own words reminds me of how impressive he was. Even in defeat. What a terrible year. Thank you.
Please make a follow up Election of 1864 video
That was an incredible piece of storytelling ✅
Interesting points about the 1860 election. The narration reminded me of Paul Harvey "Now you know...the rest of the story"
I love seeing the videos and how it’s portrayed even though I’ve already heard everything you have done on the podcast many times over 👏🏻👏🏻
I thank you! This was most excellent!!
I very much appreciate the deep dive into an easily overlooked aspect of our collective history!
Lincoln voted for someone else. What a guy!
It sounded more like he abstained from the presidential vote.
Outstanding episode, sir. Love and support from East Tennessee🫡
I’ve only seen 20 minutes so far but this is an excellent presentation and well done in every aspect. Thanks
Very interesting, seems so many people have forgotten why the Republican party was formed. Great video.
That’s why I vote democrat.
@@JohnSmith-kp7yr Because you have no brains. Awesome!
@@JohnSmith-kp7yr Why's that? Because you're pro-slavery? That was where the democrat party was at that time. The republicans had their share of know-nothing sympathizers and anti-abolitionist's but the party platform at least wanted to limit the expansion of slavery and keep the union together. So you would have been against all of that? Or is it just snark? Just askin.
Wish the confederates would have won to keep the federal government in its constitutional place
@@JohnSmith-kp7yrDemocrats were the party of slavery secession and the KKK
Great work! Well researched. Well presented and well done!
Very well done.
Best 1860 video out there. I recommend playing campaign trail for all who haven’t
Brilliant!,Thankyou.
Thanks for this, very interesting ❤
Thanks!
Great lecture
This is amazing!
You are amazing!!!
Thank you.
Awesome! I love this.
Great pictures and narration!
Thanks for your professionalism
This is my first time finding and watching this channel. This video is awesome and I love your approach to history!
Glad you enjoy it!
nice delivery!
I have donated to your channel. And will at least once a month. I enjoy your History and your work! 💯❤️👍
Thank you for the support, Terry!
Thanks
The last 5 letters...
I really love your voice. Keep the videos coming. 😍🤗👏
I hope the country learned from this and the following war, so as not to repeat history. 🤞🏽
Seems like the democrats have forgotten it…and I think that’s on purpose
Still...I appreciate your efforts
I'd love to watch a cinematic biography or miniseries of Stephen Douglas. He'd make for a delightful villain protagonist!
New subscriber here ! Hallowed be thy truth Speaker seeking speakers to Silence the charlatans Evermore!
Well I sure am glad that Abe guy won and angered the southerners so much that they fought to preserve slavery but lost otherwise I might have been born in bondage.
You misspelled democrats.
@@hughtoober As if it's the same party. Go away with the stupidity.
It would've ended before you were born chill
I doubt you would have been born in bondage but it is certainly possible without the Civil War that an apartheid system of governance would have ruled the South and there would have been no 14th or 15th Amendments to make such a system Constitutionally questionable.
In other words Apartheid would have replaced Chattel Slavery as the preferred method to control the Black populace. I know that is what happened anyway post Reconstruction with Jim Crow but this time there would have been no 14th or 15th Amendments ever in place. Those two Amendments gave Civil Rights activists a century later hope that America would one day live up to the soaring words of the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal".
I just realized Stephen Douglas looks alot like the serial poisoner William Palmer.
Neptune is in exactly the same position today as it was in 1860.
I called this in 2006.
In 1860,we had an incumbent from PA with the initials JB.
Well?
The first mosh pit! 19:20.
POWERFUL!🇺🇸
Good thing politics now are not as crazy as they were back then.
Sometimes history repeats itself, navigate world history and the speeches of leaders who warn about sirten events!!
What happened was several states wanted to become a different country. The northern states wanted to dictate policy to the entire country. This caused some states to want to succeed from the union.
Both Presidents in the Civil War were from Kentucky.
Makes sense 🤔
Lincoln had about 1%-2% popularity in Kentucky.
@@chrisgivens9632 He got 2 votes in Fayette County, where his wife is from. His wife's own familydid not vote for him.
@@johndaugherty4127 Mary Todd's brothers were confederates.
We’ll go for the great reformation- For Lincoln and Liberty too!
I like this because i living in Ireland,we really didnt get full history of American politics in our schools... Did You the Movie Lincoln was spot on or was there a bit of tweeking the truth for cinema?.Thanks .
The Political Party fractures seems familiar this year.
1860 memes were bussin frfr
The L is silent in Salmon. Pronouncing the L grates my ear. A small point. Nice presentation. Thank-you.
This presentation shows well the root couse of the Seccession crisis about 1860 election was the slavery!
Except for Arkansas, Tennessee and North Carolina Lincoln was on the balot in the border states and Missouri gave more than 10% and Delaware gave about 24% to Lincoln. Very interesting the nowdays West Virginian's county Hancock almost was won by Lincoln, only a few votes were missed! Kentucky gave about 1% to Lincoln, so eternal shame for the South Lincoln was not on the balot in 10 slave system states!
Tarrifs
@@chrisgivens9632 The North could not launch any tariff against the 7 Deep South state senators. The Morill Tariff was introduced under the Buchanan government when the original 7 Confederate states left the union with their 14 senators so no veto against the tariff!
The civil war started in LeCompton KANSAS.
When the 13 states originally agreed to act as a “United” States, it was agreed that any State could leave at any time they wished. To my knowledge this right was never revoked. In law if something is petitioned for and it has not been strictly forbidden in writing then it is assumed to be lawful. Regardless of if it would have dissolved the country doesn’t change the legality issue. Slavery was wrong and should have been outlawed, even if the country would have to pay reparations to the slave owners for their financial loss.
This is where the war industrial machines started.
It's pretty funny that the modern GOP is forever holding up its lineage from Lincoln and the original Republicans, but upon examination of the 1860 electoral map, it's clear that the Blue Wall elected Lincoln.
Ironic...
It’s irrelevant. We’re taking 160 years ago!
Any attempt to remotely relate a modern party to 1860 is a fool’s errand. The democrats today can’t even agree on what a man or woman is. What a shame we’ve become.
The party switch changed up politics quite a bit in this nation.
President Lincoln entered local politics in 1834 , associating himself with Whig Party , whose members opposed President Andrew Jackson and the Demoncrats, The Whigs fell into disarray over the issue of slavery in 1850s. President Lincoln has quit the Whig Party and become a American Republican Party and Republican Party was organized in 1854 to be a Anti-Slavery Party and Anti-racist Party to eliminate all Americans black slavery Plantation away from the Demoncratic Party's racist bigotry inventers Plantation 1860 .
@@baneofbanesThe party switch as most state it is a myth. Only a handful of sitting politicians switched parties affiliation. What you really have is one party is only slightly more open with their bias, bigotry, and racism. The other party hides theirs under the guise of “good intentions” and duplicitous language.
Thank god Buchanan didn’t run because he’s old and helpless to keep the nation United. Lincoln called out the south for their crappy actions and defeated them.
That was cool. I recommend Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin for those interested in doing a deep dive into the machinations of the republican party at that time. It is a well-written book that examines the lives of the men who opposed Lincoln, then went on to join his Cabinet. That comment from Alexander Stephens was interesting. He went on to become to the Vice President of the Confederacy and interestingly enough was one of Lincoln's closest friends during his one term as a member of congress. Jefferson Davis was quite close with William Seward. A strange civil war indeed. Perhaps that explains how the country was able to reunify as peacefully as it did. I'm not saying it was all sunshine and roses, but compared to other civil wars where heads rolled afterward the U.S. recovered and thrived rather quickly.
Kearns has been caught in so many false narratives of her views of history. She was a politician that was out of a job and because a book writer.
@@paulbrasier372 I don't know about her other books because I haven't read them. I know she was involved in democrat party politics and her husband was a member of LBJ's and JFK's staff. I simply enjoyed reading Team of Rivals. It's well written with a narrative that flows in a way that is easy to follow. David McCullough was another author who started out as a member of the Kennedy administration but that didn't color his writing. It's about good storytelling and she did a good job with that one. I'll give credit where credit is due.
I'm surprised that Lincoln didn't get Kentucky considering him and Jefferson Davis both were from the state of Kentucky. Of course, Kentucky was of Confederate leaning
Lincoln was never popular in his native state due to his oppostion to slavery.
Sorry, that should have been "start thinking ". I think auto-correct screwed me over, again.
Very good. The lingering reverberations of African slavery (not to mention Indian slavery which preceded it) are not analogous today to the racial and religious constructs that undergirded the wretched practice that ended with Lincoln. Class struggle continues, but the would-be slavers of today do not care about the skin color of those from whom they profit. They promulgate skin color wars to weaken and confuse the underclass, however, so they can more easily manipulate the political and economic world.
I think you miss the entire word of his-story and not just the last 5 letters.
What always baffles me about the Civil War and everything I watch or read about the war and the central issue of slavery…. Is the Fact that slavery was referenced in the Constitution and therefore made it legal throughout the country. (As wrong as it was).
So, Regardless of any proposed laws to abolish the practice, they would have been null and void as prescribed by the Constitution… “any law that contradicts the Constitution is immediately null and void”, because the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.
ONLY a passing and ratification of a constitutional amendment could legally abolish slavery.
And this only took place AFTER the war was ended.
It appears that politicians during that time were just as ignorant or irresponsible as politicians of today. - Believing they have the authority and power to make any law they choose, based on emotions and popularity rather than the Constitution.
The USA is a Republic = a nation of Laws, Not a Democracy = a nation of men with usual misguided popularity.
The Republican party program was a compromize to stop the slavery system in the future new states as Colorado, Montana, North Dakota and others. Yes the only possibility for the abolution was one slavery system state decided to banish slavery. Delaware had 1.6% slave population so it could have been that Delaware state abolished its slave about 1870, Missouri had 9.7% slaves so Missouri could have been its slaves about 1880. The new not slave system states as Ideho, South Dakota, Colorado and others together with the old exslaver system states as Delaware and Missouri an others would have been 75% to abolish the slavery in the USA Constitution about 1920!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Deeap South did not want any abolution about 1920 they wanted ETERNAL SLAVERY SYSTEM!
Huh?
Abra. Hamlin. Coln
Will history show that this coming election was as important for our country, as the 1860 election?
Probably not. It’s just not that serious. It only seems as though because you’re actually living it.
@@christinafidance340 nation is fracturing...
My great great grandfather was a civil war veteran, and voted for Abraham Lincoln
Did you want a cookie?
Give him a cookie. If he could see how your cuntry turned out. Do you think he d be happy
Is the narrator an AI voice?
he's real.
I can't agree with you that we face the same challenges today ? We are only divided on policy not race and it's my opinion that you can't make the mistake of comparing the countries environment back then to today's circumstances anymore who still believes that there is a overwhelming race problem in this country needs to get off the plantation and come into the real world there's never been a more better time in the history of this great nation for equality
Wrong....Not respecting the dates for context, is as dumb as recounting a man's life, and not acknowledging, that events in one part of his life colored his views in the other parts of his life.. Just, ''Telling stories'' is how our Country has lost perspective, and our students and citizenry is so uneducated about it's past. Why is this title, ''Election of 1860'', if dates not important.
I couldn't help but think the exact same thing when he said that.
Do you not think his decision to not put his name on the ballot of southern states was more of a cause to succession? I understand that movement had already began but that is an incredible F you...
Now it is 2024. If California, New York, Atlanta, Oregon, Massachusetts, Philadelphia, a couple of cities in Wisconsin can pick the President (with probably a good amount of voter fraud), you have to wonder whether over half the US will accept that - particularly if there are indications of voter fraud.
There was no evidence of widespread voter fraud, I'm curious how you think that works anyway and how so many people would get away with it. lol. Have you even given it thought? The only people who are saying they lost by voter fraud are .....ready for it...the ones that lost, by 7 million votes! Swing states are usually the telling ticket, and the last few elections have come down to Florida. Everybody knows California, New York and major metropolitan cities are blue. They always are. They will be this election year too. It's definitely not the deciding states, rather, just blue states, so expect them to vote accordingly. Those who think when they lose that it was rigged are not half of the U.S. They are only roughly a third of the country. They are just really loud and cult-like.
Correct. Especially Atlanta Fulton county If the Georgia sec of state doesn’t monitor these criminals closely I’ll closely work to support another GA sec of state I promise. Fulton county CHEATS AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT!!!!
with seward there would have been no war
Seward was rejected due to the fact that he was seen by moderates and Southerns as more radical than the other candidates,
except that he wasn't.
@@brianwolle2509
It doesn't matter that he was not. He was seen as such by the general public, the newspapaers and the party. “The Irrepressible Conflict” speech made him seen that way.
the only place he was rejected, was at the wigwam. thurlow weed failed and david davis tricked the states in many ways to get lincoln nominated.
not as simple as you make it sound... i seem to know a lot more about it.
The opening comment is nice but .... "History is a story and needs to be taught that way" . Slow down. That could easily be taken to mean that there is the true story to be told. 34 years teaching the subject ... and History is an ongoing debate with new research and new perspectives enriching it. The important thing is tossing out childish fairy tales that use widespread acceptance to bury realities, be it Tulsa or the annexation of Hawai'i
Overly melodramatic narration...the actual history is certainly dramatic enough!! Unfortunately David McCullough is gone from us but had a much more pleasant voice for narration
Thumbs down on 1619; whether those guys were free, endentured, or enslaved, Virginia was not the root of large-scale slavery in America. In the 1600s, there were three English colonies in the New World: Jamestowne, for gold-diggers who finally managed to plant a successful tobacco society; Plymouth (closely followed by Mass Bay) where the religious dissidents tormented Quakers and anybody else who happened by; and, FIRSTLY (albeit established last), Barbados, where the sugar planters were making fortunes off the backs of African slaves. Around 1665 - 1670-ish, Sir John Yeamans (and probably his friend James Elizie Moore) transplanted African slavery to the present United States in Charlestowne, Carolina. James E. Moore imported thousands of slaves from Africa, and exported Indian slaves to the Carribean. Moore married Yeaman's wife's daughter, so they were obviously very close. I wish people would not be fooled by this "1619 Project." The slavery that brought about our Civil War came from Barbados. American slavery essentially started with the founding of Charleston, SC. Interesting side note: the people in Barbados did not want any Indians from Massachusetts because they were incorrigible and made bad slaves--that was right after King Phillip's War, when the good Puritans tried to send their Indians there.
Otherwise, I love the videos.
P.S.. And, and, and . . . . . . . . Bacon's Rebellion---crushing poor whites & blacks together.
"A slow burning fuse that touched off a powder keg..." some fine melodrama from our narrator there. Lincoln wanted to preserve the union, with or without slavery in the beginning of the war. It would also be well to hear some other reasons for secession, like Northern tariffs that were crippling the Southern economy.
Therefore, I could see the political leadership of the Southern States think: the Republicans were able to elect the President without anybody from the South or Border States agreeing - and with the addition of the Western Territories it will only get worse. The Republicans want to destroy the Southern economy without any plan on how the South can make money without slaves. Over half of the value of US exports comes from the South. We don’t need the North economically or politically. Let us split off. Hence Secession.
That is not true. GOP wanted to gradualy end slave labor and replaced it with free labor.
The GOP economic platform was based of the American system, which way deisgned by the likes of Alexander Hamilton and Henry Clay.
The Federal government would raised tariffs to protect the nascent industries from the unfair competition from overseas and to build infrastructure to make interstate commerce cheaper and faster. Under this system the South could have developted decent textile, shippbuilding, sugar, many other industries in order to replace the cash crop plantation system.
Slavery…what a sin.
Far to often your speech is to loud and forceful thus cheapening the effect and distracting from the effective ability to deliver the message clearly. I do like the topic and the research that went into the "lesson".
Q
Narrator is to dramatic.
The over pronunciation of every other word makes this unwatchable.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Thanks!
Thanks!