As the clans gathered at Charleston, the notable difference developed itself, that while one wing was filled with unbounded enthusiasm for a candidate, the other was animated by an earnest and stubborn devotion to an idea.
[Sidenote] Murat Halstead, "Conventions of 1860." "Douglas was the pivot individual of the Charleston Convention," wrote an observant journalist; "every delegate was for or against him; every motion meant to nominate or not nominate him; every parliamentary war was _pro_ or _con_ Douglas." This was the surface indication, and, indeed, it may be said with truth, it was the actual feeling of the Northern faction of the Democratic party.

Douglas was a genuinely popular leader.

He had the power to inspire a pure personal enthusiasm.

He had aroused such hero-worship as may be possible in modern times and in American polities.

Beyond this, however, the Lecompton controversy, and his open persecution by the Buchanan Administration, made his leadership and his candidacy a necessity to the Northern Democrats.
With Southern Democrats the feeling went somewhat deeper.