Re: Help design the ideal Presidential candidate

I'm sure the doyens of soc.history.what-if could respond much more
cogently.  In fact, I'd be surprised if they haven't discussed it in
depth already.

In article <b3jnf5xsaj.ln2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Nate Edel <archmage@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Indeed (although this is jumping ahead), it's far from clear that the
>issues of the territories would have been settlable peacefully, even
>if the core issue of secession was uncontested.

Speech challenge (100 pts).  Difficulty: low.  You are a Confederate
statesman.  Deliver a 10-minute speech justifying
- a share of the Federal territories
- all Federal forts, arsenals, &c within the borders of Confederate
  states
- no share of the Federal debt

Difficulty: medium.  For 50 bonus points, justify *all* territories
being shared.

>Attempts to grab Cuba, etc etc are another matter (and ignore the
>amusing thought of a war between Spain and the Confederacy in the
>case of Cuba) - I don't think the US would be likely to end up in a
>war in North America over Confederate violations of the Monroe
>doctrine, especially if they were smart enough to do their fighting
>through local proxies and filibusters.  OTOH, wars that start being
>fought by proxies can get pretty nasty.

The Union would want, I think, to confine the Confederacy.  OTOH,
Spanish atrocities and the Spanish slave-trade had been a staple of
the yelling press.  I could see a Union government backing itself out
onto a limb in supporting a Spanish colonial government.  Hilarity
ensues.

-- 
Tim McDaniel, tmcd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]