I guess I’ll just take your word for it. I just don’t see how it would have been possible with almost the complete absence of a strong and expansive federal government combined with a general commitment on both sides to state’s rights, and the overall war-weariness of Northern voters.

The idea that either side's partisans had a serious commitment to "state's rights", or that Reconstruction triggered 'war-weariness' in Northern voters is absurd.

No occupation, no long-lasting reform.

Good thing that Reconstruction literally was an occupation then?

For fun, look into what it took to “reconstruct” Germany and Japan post-WW2.

3 years of serious denazification, 7 of restricted anti-Nazi sentiment, and 13 of anti-Nazi cultural pressure?

This is you confusing what ought to be with what could have been.

"The 1876 election HAD to be disputed!"

Okay, buddy.