Was he the bad guy?
>>73336925
>Was he the bad guy?
Yes.
No.
yes, republican party only managed to produce one good president - Coolige
>>73337262
Damned yankee.
>>73336925
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!!
>>73337262
No, if he wasn't assassinated he would have deported all the slaves back to Africa
>>73336925
The bad guy in what?
In the civil war it was the Jews who were the bad guys. He was just the puppet.
>>73336925
Yes. northern yankee faggot here.
No, he's a top-five President.
He did expand the power of the federal government to a huge degree, but he was still based. Lincoln not being assassinated is one of the most interesting alt-histories.
>>73336925
for you
>>73336925
No. He is the third greatest president the USA ever had and a stone child bad ass.
Also bonus points for being the first Republican party president.
>>73336925
He wanted to ship the freed slaves back to Africa, so you tell me
No. He was going to ship the blacks back to Africa, presumably Liberia because he knew they would have a better future there.
>>73337423
Kill yourself traitor
Yes for his actions during the Civil War
No because he was aware that freeing hundreds of thousands of illiterate, uneducated, and untrained niggers into the US to fend for themselves was a fucking retarded idea; so he wanted to send them all to Libya or some other African nation.
John Wilkes Boothe shot him before he could get that ball rolling. He was the real villain here.
>>73336925
Absolutely. He overstepped federal power, fracturing the union. America has been in a sorry state ever since.
Yes
>>73337325
Don't forget Harding (just prior to Coolidge)
He ran on a "Return to Normalcy" after the screw up of President Wilson
pic related, lincoln was a race realist
If he was alive today, he would regret not sending them all back, senpaitachi
>>73337572
What actions? The south up and left just because he was elected. He fucking put down the rebels and achived his abolitionist goals like any good leader would have
>>73337357
this
>>73336925
No. John booth was a massive faggot. If he hadn't hurt Abe there would be no blacks here and we would be unified. Slaves divided our country into two and he was going to deport all of them to Liberia. If Lincoln had lived we would be in a much better place.
>>73336925
He's not a good guy, he's not a bad guy, he is the guy
>>73337705
>achived his abolitionist goals
If you mean only freeing slaves in southern states where he couldn't enforce it only because they didn't rejoin the union, then sure
>>73336925
Greatest statesman in American history. Yeah he was a bad mother.
>Lincoln waged a war that cost the lives of 620,000 Americans. Including the murder of 50,000 innocent Southern civilians.
> He arrested several thousand Marylanders suspected of Southern sympathies, including 30 members of the State legislature, a US Congressman representing Maryland, the mayor and police commissioner of Baltimore, and most of the Baltimore city council. These political detainees were imprisoned in Fort McHenry and Point Lookout without trial, in many cases, for several years.
>He suspended the writ of habeas corpus without the consent of Congress (as required by the Constitution).
>He illegally shut down and confiscated the printing presses of dozens of newspapers that had spoken out against him.
>>73338027
sup Vince?
>>73336925
I doubt Lincoln was a bad person, I think at is heart he was earnest and strong in his convictions.
But he was one of the most incompetent presidents we've ever had. He changed generals more than underwear and he there were several times when he almost destroyed the Union war effort despite the resource and population advantages the North had over the South.
He needed a long bloody war to make himself great because he would have been forgettable otherwise
>>73337705
>up and left
Because the north, with their huge population advantage, was voting on economic policy that was crippling the southern economy and the south had zero recourse against it. Lincoln, who did not even appear on southern ballots, still got elected president, and the south knew that his policies would completely bankrupt them.
>>73337705
Becoming a dictator inthe process, destroyed a vital part of the constitution, took federal powers and said "fuck the right to secede when you're being oppressed".
The man became a tyrant, and he is partly responsible for how powerful the federal government became as strong as it is now.
>>73337961
You're hopelessly naive if you think that was ever going to happen.
>>73336925
Most assuredly. Not allowing secession was the worst thing that happened to us.
>>73338641
RARE
>>73337407
>>73336925
Ignore the Confederate LARPers in this thread.
Lincoln wanted to ship all of the niggers back to Africa after the war.
>>73336925
I'm from MS. As much as I want to say 'yes', I cannot.
Everything he did while in office was done under the singular tenet that this is ONE country and that states do not have the legal authority to secede. All of the loose play with the Constitution and executive power, while setting dangerous and unusual precedent for that time, was righteous toward his central aim...preservation of the union. He never wanted to be that kind of President or have to prosecute a war to quell an insurrection. The war was the South's fault. Of course the South was headed toward being a political minority on the issue of slavery. Of course the industrial revolution would have ended the necessity for slave labor. Imagine what the country would have looked like had the South chosen to work within the normal political process. Lincoln would have been a one term president, like most that came before him, with no meaningful accomplishments during his tenure. Had the South not seceded, the Democratic Party would likely have fractured just like the Whigs and ceased to exist in any national capacity into the late 19th century.
No he wasn't. The south was supported by European bank kikes.
>>73336925
He didn't really care if the slaves were free or not, he just wanted the civil war to end.
>>73339601
>Everything he did while in office was done under the singular tenet that this is ONE country and that states do not have the legal authority to secede.
which is a lie. the states made the federal government, and the states can take it away, or leave it.
he was a war criminal, he got what he deserved.
Here's the deal. On a constitutional interpretative basis, I think the right to secede is plausible.
However, implicit permanence but for congressional permission to secede also has legal plausibility based on the history of the US, how the AOC weren't intended to be dissolved, and how a more perfect union was implied by the founders to be permanent.
I'm a huge 10th Amendment supporter.
I think Lincoln acted unconstitutionally at times.
That said- he wanted to preserve the union and spread the US from sea to sea.
He was going to connect both shores by rail.
Agricultural production in slave states was actually inferior acre-by-acre to production in non-slave states, which utilized new tech.
Slavery prevented the south from going into manufacturing, and cucked non-slave holders into a backwards economy.
Lincoln wanted to kick the blacks out at least, or give them exile them into desert land with sterile pack animals at most.
>>73340139
>which is a lie. the states made the federal government, and the states can take it away, or leave it.
I actually agree. However the states once in the compact may not act outside of the compact's parameters. SCOTUS and congress set the parameters, and the executive enforces them.
To split a state, incorporate a state, or secede, it has to go through congress.
>>73340139
>>73340729
>>73340901
I'll grant that in the mid-19th century the right to secede was a hotly debate constitutional issue. I remember reading somewhere that Scalia gave a speech where out outlined a legal principle (the latin or french phrase eludes me) of "settled through action." Essentially in his view the Civil War settled the matter of the legally of secession through "action." Historical events made secession illegal.
>>73337407
>he would have deported all the slaves back to Africa
so he's a good guy?
>>73342062
There's no evidence that Lincoln intended to deport former slaves. In fact, all historical evidence supports that he was intending to support the enfranchisement of free black men, albeit through a very slow and gradual process.
