Lincoln was the first President elected from the Republican party, and his philosophy of government would make him a Republican today. The ideals of self-reliance, limited government, and national unity are as valid today as they were in 1860.
2006-08-07 20:09:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
President Lincoln was a Republican when he was elected and I still see him as one according to modern politics. His stance on the actions of the south were that the union must be upheld at whatever cost even at the cost of war. There are many similarities between the America of the 1860s and our current day and age. The country is divided based on political ideology with neither side willing to compromise. The Democratic Party of his time divided in a northern and southern democratic party which each nominated their own candidates in the 1860 election remind anyone of Ralph Nader in 2000? That split allowed Lincoln to win the only election he ever won for the Presidency with a 44%. The Modern Democratic Party is nearly as fractured with a pro-war and an antiwar factions swaying most of the party.
2006-08-07 20:18:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Ray 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Lincoln was Republican and would still be based on his beliefs. There were lies and corruption within his office just as it has been in almost every Presidential office. Lincoln did free the slaves but only in the states that were not in rebellion. He also failed to save the country, a civilization was destroyed and I am not talking about slavery. Based on the times, there was as much fault found with Lincoln as with other Presidents.
2006-08-11 19:41:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
People need to read their history more. Lincoln was a great president. But there was corruption in his government and the list of incompetent Generals that were in place in the Northern army due to political favors was staggering. Also he fought the war without terms, even though the Democrats wanted to negotiate a peaceful settlement. Sound familiar?
If he had the US would be a third world country made up of Independent states
2006-08-07 20:30:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by mark g 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well remember that Republican meant something diffrent then.............
I would argue moderate democrat for the following reason.
that the Republicans in congress had a powerful and influencial faction called the Radcial Republicans who sought to give Blacks equality an compensation.........
this sounds more like a modern democrat arguement....
can you imagine the modern republicans responce to someone getting 40 acres and a mule?
2006-08-07 20:14:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by nefariousx 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The social gathering of Lincoln isn't the social gathering of Lincoln to any extent further. Lincoln substitute right into a federalist and loads of his political combating substitute into professional-federal and anti-state rights. His base of skill substitute into the Northeast. His customary opposition substitute into interior the South. He stepped forward civil rights (surely human rights) for blacks. except you have been dwelling in a cave, you will possibly understand all those factors as being solidly democrat.
2016-11-04 02:53:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
None because Lincoln was a good President and the one who saved America.
He was a Republican but because he helped free black folks he couldn't be Republican now.
2006-08-07 20:08:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither. He would have to stand as an Independent in order to keep his principles. There was only ever one Lincoln.
2006-08-07 20:11:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Bart S 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I could see him as a moderate of either party. Someone near the middle like John McCain or Bill Clinton.
2006-08-07 20:08:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Shall we channel him from the dead? Let's see, he freed the slaves but was against integration. I guess he'd be a Dixiecrat by todays standards? Maybe we should leave this one alone.
2006-08-09 21:30:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by Composer 4
·
0⤊
0⤋