In all of the works I’ve read so far covering the Civil War, my impression has always been that if Atlanta had held out until the election of 1864 (a bit over two months more than it actually did) McClellan becomes president in 1865 and makes peace with the South. But reading more about just how far behind the South was in industrial production and how their entire economy was strapped for cash in “Battle Cry of Freedom” by James McPherson makes me wonder how the South was even able to hold out as long as they did. So was Foote right?
Without veering too far into alternate history, Fremont wouldn't have stayed in whether Atlanta had fallen or not - and you'd probably need a very unlikely sound Union defeat, not just "holding out," for Atlanta to look like anything other than the concluding chapter of the war.
Lincoln won the popular vote 55% to 45%, and the Electoral College 91% to 9%. You would need ten percent of Lincoln's voters to switch, not just stay home, to get to a narrow electoral victory for McClellan (and he'd still narrowly lose the popular vote). That's a very tall order, and even if McClellan took power Lincoln would have another four months to prosecute the war. By the time the Democrats took power, Atlanta would have fallen. The Confederacy might hold out hopes for peace talks, but by November 1864 it was already teetering.
As for McClellan, he favored continuing the war and restoring the Union; he repudiated his own party's platform which called for a ceasefire and a negotiated peace. If he had assumed office on the verge of total victory, there is simply no way he would stop the war.
In all of the works I’ve read so far covering the Civil War, my impression has always been that if Atlanta had held out until the election of 1864 (a bit over two months more than it actually did) McClellan becomes president in 1865 and makes peace with the South.
McClellan would have being inaugurated on March 4, 1865, Appomattox surrender was April 1865, even if McClellan had being elected the war would have being all but won by the time he took office.
I don't think so given Shelby Foote is essentially Lost Cause and even that he would fight for the Confederacy in one interview I would not take him at face value so would historians recently when they reacted to HBO's Confederate creators reading one of his books.
If we are talking about earlier periods of the Civil War like the July 1861-January 1862 (between Bull Run/Manassas I and the aftermath of the Trent Affair), summer and fall pre-Antietam 1862 (between the end of the Seven Days in July to September), and post-Fredericksburg December 1862-Mud March 1863 then Foote's quote does not apply here as contemporary witnesses such as soldiers, civilians, and supporters of the war effort (which I have quoted in other online forums like Civil War Talk and took them from various different books and some articles) and certain events would have highly disagreed with him I always have to remind my friends about what was said and observed in these periods to get a better grasp of what was actually going on of which some ignore and continue on with this tripe. In regards to had there more Southern successes Foote doesn't take into consideration how Northern public morale/opinion would have been affected by it which is very important without it you don't have war and had there been more victories by the South it would have caused Northern civilians and soldiers to question and abandon even fighting in a conflict that looked hopeless not the other hand.
Since we are discussing the pre-Atlanta period well its tougher compared to the previous three periods but for McClellan taking on the war if there isn't a capture of the city this depends on whether McClellan does continue fighting or make peace if he does then I doubt there would be survival for the South since it's a bit too late for say foreign recognition compared to 1861-1862 (either another Anglo-American War started by the Trent Affair or recognition/meditation) and it's been exhausted plud McClellan did not necessarily agree with the Democrats peace platform but if he does reluctantly agree to abide by that platform then a Southern victory would be eked out.
Why did Lincoln go so far as to write in late August:
“This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this Administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to so co-operate with the President-elect as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration; as he will have secured his election on such ground that he can not possibly save it afterwards.”
Also, given that McClellan vacillated so much about the platform, and in any case would have rescinded emancipation, the South would basically come out with what amounted to a tie (like in the War of 1812).
More broadly though, I think this statement that the north was always pre-destined to win doesn’t seem so obvious, because there was only so much political will to keep the war going