abraham lincoln?

Question

what do you think of him? was he a good pres? was he unfair?

Answer 1

With Lincoln, evaluation of his job as a president is in the eye of the beholder. If you believe in a strong federal government over a Union then you must appreciate what Lincoln did to preserve and strengthen the Union.

If you believe in the Constitution as visualized by most (if not all) of the Founders then you must view President Lincoln with horror as he destroyed the Constitution of the
Founders.

To be realistic about what Lincoln faced when he took office, it was a terrible situation that President Buchanan left to him. Buchanan primarily left it all to Lincoln hoping that the situation would resolve itself. However, this had been building for 70 years and the odds of avoiding war was small odds. Interestingly, if the primary causative factor had been slavery, it is likely Lincoln would have left it to resolve itself. This would have realistically followed what had already occurred in a number of other countries where slavery disappeared without a war.

As with some Buchanan’s cabinet members, many of Lincoln’s cabinet members pushed with all their might to force the seceding States to remain in the Union. For example, the firing on Fort Sumter would never have occurred without Buchanan attempting to re-supply it with the ship the Star of the West. He ands his cabinet were informed in advance that this would be considered (by South Carolina) to be an act of war and in that context fired on the ship. That firing was actually the start of the war.

When Lincoln took office obviously Fort Sumter (along with other forts, mints, etc.) was of high interest due to his campaign promise to keep all federal properties in the South. General Winfield Scott reported to Lincoln that it would take at least 20,000 troops to keep Fort Sumter. At that point such troops were not available. The moving ahead to maintain Fort Sumter as a Union facility was both stupid as well as likely not Constitutional.

During the war Lincoln did many things which were not constitutional not the least of which was, dropping Habeas Corpus, placing politicians (of the North) in jail for speech against the war, making the allegation that States had no power to secede (constitutionally wrong), not only supporting General Sherman’s march to the sea, but committing the General to make war against the civilian populace (women and children), laying the ground work for the 14th Amendment which changed the Constitution to apply the Bill of Rights to the States as well as the federal government (the intent of the Founders). Lincoln torn the Constitution to shreds.

In an economic context, by the end of the first three months after Fort Sumter the Union’s war time deficit rose to exceed $17,000,000. Initiating this war Lincoln caused a major increase in the cost of government. In 1858 the entire cost of government rose to $74.2 million. Ultimately this war would cost $1.75 million per day. The existing source of government revenue was tariffs and the sale of land and the war changed this method. The change began (1861) with a direct tax on real estate exceeding $20 million administered through the State governments. Within a year Congress passed (Lincoln signed) the Internal Revenue Act which taxed nearly everything including a stamp tax and an inheritance tax and this created the Internal Revenue bureaucracy. However, in August of 1861 Congress passed and Lincoln signed the nations first national income tax. This latter tax was unconstitutional.

The point is that Lincoln’s singular goal (by any means) was to protect the Union whether his acts were constitutional or not was of little matter.

Answer 2

First I'd like to start by pointing out that Jim is wrong. Lincoln was not a Conservative. He was Republican, but it was the GOP that were considered the Liberals of that day.


There's actually a little debate over Abraham Lincoln. It cannot be denied that he got the job done in the Civil War, staying strong and keeping the country together. But there is the question of whether or not the South would have seceded had he not been elected. Now, tensions had been growing between the North and South for several decades, but what finally pushed them over the edge of Lincoln's election. Had either John Breckinridge or John Bell, who both ran in the election of 1860 been elected, the Civil War might have been avoided altogether. If not avoided, it could have been delayed, which would only have given the industrializing North a larger advantage, shortening the war.

As far as a president, there is debate there too. If you look at his economic stances, he was what many would call a mercantalist. This is where the government creates an artificial monopoly in effort to keep prices low. This is a technique that is now known to be ineffective and inefficient. Also, few know that President Lincoln arrested thousands of people, holding them without a trial, which is very obviously against the Constitution.

In all, he remained a Southern sympathizer and most believe he wished to grant amnesty to the returning Confederates. This obviously was the right move seeing as you these two nations would have to come together and live as one. I believe Lincoln was a good president, but the whole situation leaves you a lot to question what would have happened had he not been elected.

Answer 3

He very well may have been the greatest president that we've ever had. Not only for his eventual freeing of the slaves but because of the moral fiber he was make of.

Answer 4

What a President. Can you imagine what the press would say about him if he were present. You know he was a Conservative?

Answer 5

No i think he was wanna of the greatest presidents there are.