Do you think Lincoln would have won had the State legislatures voted for electors?

[Microsecessionist]

I was thinking that he wouldn't have won had the state legislature of NY voted for electors. I thought I read that his team campaigned heavily in NY. I also know that had he lost NY, the election would've been thrown to the House.

However, I don't know whether NY's legislature was mostly Jacksonian/Democratic in 1860, but I was under the impression that it was.

I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but I'm asking because I'm always wondering what the effects popular voting has had on libertarians and I think Lincoln may or may not be a good example since Lincoln was the worst President.

[Galileo Galilei]

just an FYI, in the 1858 Senate race, Lincoln edged Douglas in the popular vote, but Douglas edged Lincoln in the state legislature. They ahd a non-binding statewide vote at that time in Illinois.

[Microsecessionist]

just an FYI, in the 1858 Senate race, Lincoln edged Douglas in the popular vote, but Douglas edged Lincoln in the state legislature. They ahd a non-binding statewide vote at that time in Illinois.
Thanks for info:) Why did they have two different votes in IL?

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Never understood why the election of 1860 is usually referred to as the "Lincoln-Douglas" election, when Breckinridge finished second to Lincoln.

[Microsecessionist]

Never mind, I found out why. So I can conclude that the closer to direct democracy the country was in 1860, the more liberty there was. Jefferson against Adams (the former beat the hell out of his Federalist opponents in the popular vote, but would've lost the electoral vote had it not been for the 3/5 compromise), Jackson against the National Socialist Clay, Lincoln not even getting 2/5 of the popular vote, and finally the two times the Bourbon Democrats won the popular vote but not the presidency. However, Bush was probably less poisonous than Gore (I fail to imagine Gore not going into Iraq).

[Galileo Galilei]

Thanks for info:) Why did they have two different votes in IL?

They did it to give voice to the people, yet retained the power to pick Senators in the legislature. Tthese advisory elections were, of course, the forerunners of the 17th amendment 55 years later.

[Galileo Galilei]

Never mind, I found out why. So I can conclude that the closer to direct democracy the country was in 1860, the more liberty there was. Jefferson against Adams (the former beat the hell out of his Federalist opponents in the popular vote, but would've lost the electoral vote had it not been for the 3/5 compromise), Jackson against the National Socialist Clay, Lincoln not even getting 2/5 of the popular vote, and finally the two times the Bourbon Democrats won the popular vote but not the presidency. However, Bush was probably less poisonous than Gore (I fail to imagine Gore not going into Iraq).

without the 3/5th compromise, Adams would have won by even more. The 3/5th rule reduced the population counts of the states that had slaves.