In this day and age how do you think either Lincoln or Washinton would make out as president?

Answer 1

Washington was more photogenic than Lincoln (who I'd say was definitely more distinct, though).

Lincoln would not have played well on camera. People wanted to kick him out of office in his first few years, and for awhile it wasn't sure if he'd even be reelected. It took some years before his greatness was truly recognized, because while he was kind and likeable, he did not cater to people and demographics.

In many ways (well, all, maybe), he was the opposite of our current president. Lincoln surrounded himself with his political enemies so that he could hear alternate points of view; he wanted to be involved in what was going on in the field; he was extremely strategic in his thinking and planned far in advance; he was often torn over how to proceed and would have liked to avoid war if at all possible (and it took awhile for him to take a strong stance on slavery); he was an actual uniter, rather than divider; he was interested in issues; he was extremely honest; he was quite intelligent; he was a superb orator and debater and writer.

If George W. Bush is truly reflective of the will of today's US people, then Lincoln should surely fare poorly in an election if one were held today. If Lincoln were actually president, hmmm... it could go either way. He most certainly would have planned better as well as respected and cared more about other people and countries.

I'm quite sure he'd get a kick out of the Internet and would be very tech-savvy. He'd probably be one of our more technological/geek presidents. He'd appeal more to the Gen X and younger.

Washington would do a little better -- he's Al Gore, but with charisma and less hubris. He was considered noble and honorable, he was tall for his time, he was considerate, he was good at logistics, he was brave and knew he had to be in front of his people during the war, he understood how to be a symbol of the people, someone they could look up to as a leader. (i.e., he had to convey leadership, even if he was not great at some things).

Again, I'd point towards a more personable version of Al Gore of George Bush, Sr. -- he'd definitely garner more respect, but they're similar temperaments. People would probably nod and accept his tenure.

Answer 2

Good question. IMO both wartime presidents woudl probably fair quite well, but for different reasons.

Gerneral Washington, who understood military conflicts very well, most likely woudl've handled the aftermath of 9/11 appropriately by going directly after the enemy - Al Qeada, not a 3rd part such as Iraq.

Lincoln, had excellent intelligence reports and and gave his generals and staff the freedom to act as they felt necessary. Whlie he may not have agreed with all that occured (think Genral Sherman), the strategy was effective and successful.

Answer 3

Washington was a warrior, with the current conditions of our country being at war. I really believe that Washington would be pulling us up and making sure that we didn't loose anymore lives and would be creating great strategic plans to pull out our the battle slump that we are in.

Lincoln would probably be a good president as well because he truly believed in equality. With so many people fighting the government for equal rights for homosexuality, I believe he would have already found a suitable way of handling the situation. But, what I would be afraid of with him, would be another way of a civil war to outbreak because of wanting to give homosexuals rights like the average "normal" human. Because if you remember history, that is why we had the first civil war, because he wanted to offer "blacks" the same ammenities as the white person, as well as incorporate the same rights for women as well.

Answer 4

i think we need a Washington. When Washington ruled as president he was looked at as godlike. I think the Americans need someone who will lead with a strong and confident hand. And someone who has fought in war and seen the hell of it.

at the same time a Lincoln would be good because he dealt with a country that was in two distinct pieces. Right now the US is split over alot of issues.

Intresting point to ponder. Thanks-

Answer 5

Neither would survive the liberal onslaught. Both had deep religious faith, and expressed them. Washington would never approve of the liberal courts of today, and Lincoln talked funny. Libs laugh at and judge every stammer and stutter from Bush. Can you imagine how small minded they'd be with Lincoln's odd looks and country twang?

Answer 6

Washington's deep religious beliefs and his frequent references to God in his speech and writings, plus his strong support of the limited government of the Constitution, would make him be considered a reactionary ultra right-wing fundamentalist nut by the media and the Democrats of today.

Lincoln, who spoke funny, who was a divider (his election literally split the nation in half), who had very low approval ratings during "Mr. Lincoln's War" and who ran roughshod over a lot of freedoms and rights (suspension of writ of habeas corpus, preventing the Maryland legislature from assembling to vote on secession, using military to put down anti-draft riots, etc.), heck, he'd be pilloried worse than Bush is by the media and Dems.

Answer 7

Although Washington was popular, he wasn't so politically astute. Lincoln would be fine and do well with Congress with his own brand of bargaining and reason. But if they were as good as the history books tell us, they would look for a job at Microsoft.

Answer 8

Washington and Lincoln would reduce the size of government!

Answer 9

Lincoln would never get elected.

Washington, being one of the richest men in America, would opt not to run.

Answer 10

Of our past presidents the only one that I think would do well is Theodore Roosevelt. He could and would stand up to both the liberals & the press.