Which would most likely have been supported by states’ rights advocates during the 1860 presidential election?

States' rights advocates would have supported John C. Breckinridge during the 1860 presidential election.

Breckinridge's electoral program was almost identical to that of the other three candidates (especially in terms of increasing Federal Government spending on infrastructure), except for two major differences; one of those differences was that Breckinridge did not want to raise tariffs as the other candidates wanted to do. But the main difference was in the issue of the slavery of African-Americans, because Breckinridge proposed extending slavery to the Western Territories that were on the way to becoming States, while the others opposed this measure (and in the case of Lincoln he even wanted to eliminate it some day in the Southern States).

The Democrats of the South and their candidate Breckinridge wanted to legalize slavery in those territories so that when they were converted into States and therefore they will begin to send Senators and Representatives to Congress and participate in the presidential elections; they could tip the balance of political power in favor of the slavers and thus ensure that the institution of slavery was never eliminated by the abolitionists of the North.

tea which is where the whole thing about dumping it in the ocean came from

during the debate over his landmark energy policy proposal, president jimmy carter failed to consult one of the most powerful senators, louisiana’s russell long, who would have a big say over whether the legislation moved through the upper chamber. this was classic carter. with a strong distaste for congressional politics, the president simply refused to do what most other presidents would consider routine, such as courting key senators. long became so irate with the president that when he was finally invited to a white house dinner, he stood up to ask a question and, before doing so, proceeded to sarcastically introduce himself: “i’m russell long, chairman of the senate finance committee.”

this interaction is a revealing moment in stuart e. eizenstat’s fascinating new history of carter’s presidency. the former peanut farmer from georgia was a president who, according to conventional wisdom, didn’t care much for party politics; nonetheless, in eizenstat’s view, carter’s legacy on domestic and foreign policy has been vastly underappreciated. the author paints carter as a “bold and determined” leader who bravely attacked the challenges of his time. eizenstat goes so far as to argue that carter might very well be the most successful one-term president in american history.