I’d consider the US to be more of a regional power/great power than a superpower pre-WWII.
Yeah, the general definition of superpower is to have the ability to direct force/influence around the world. The USA could probably do that in the late 19th century. But I’d also think it requires a desire to be able to do so, and the USA was too isolationist outside its regions of interest (North America, Carribean, Pacific). Plus, being a superpower implies some sort of dominance globally, and again the USA was too isolationist. Too many other great powers that wouldn’t back US policy. That’s all completely different during and after WWII.
I wouldn’t consider the US to be anywhere near superpower status until its economy passed the British economy (1880’s, I think). Before then it was too focused internally, and after that is when it really started to build up its navy, which is key to being a superpower (or at least the American method for being one).
For the War of 1812: the USA lost that war in several ways. The only reason it didn’t lose anything was Britain was too focused on Napoleon. It certainly contributed to great power status, though (being able to go toe to toe with the British Empire and come out ok).