Who would be a better President Washington or Lincoln?

[Gunny]

hmm, going on ones ability to deal with the hate, and critics that come with the job alone, I would vote for Lincoln. though we call him one of the greats, he was almost universally hated when in office, he was often called a baboon.

And he trampled the Constitution like it was a cigarette butt. Lincoln couldn't get away with the crap he did today.

 

[Gunny]

This may sound really weird to you guys. But I'm just wondering who you guys think would be a better President if they were alive today? George Washington or Abraham Lincoln?

Let me know what you think...

Neither. Washington wouldn't recognize this "thing" we call a government and wonder WTF we did with what he and the other FF's created for us.

Lincoln would never make it in the primaries. If he did, and was as ham-handed now with the Constitution as he was then, he'd be impeached.

 

[Gungnir]

I disagree GunnyL.
Washington would either stay a businessman and marvel in horror at what has happened, or start a revolution.

Lincoln would probably try to take Washington on, I doubt he could garner enough money to win the Presidential election, but if he did he would be stonewalled at every effort. Iraq would be done, and we would probably see the modern William Tecumseh Sherman marching through Islamabad or Riyadh.

 

[Charles_Main]

And he trampled the Constitution like it was a cigarette butt. Lincoln couldn't get away with the crap he did today.

Agreed, but then if he had not, we might be 2 nations today, or even more than 2. I think you would agree. I picked Lincoln Because like You said I do not think Washington would want any part of our government today, and I think he was to dignified to put up with the way presidents are treated today.

 

[Gunny]

Agreed, but then if he had not, we might be 2 nations today, or even more than 2. I think you would agree. I picked Lincoln Because like You said I do not think Washington would want any part of our government today, and I think he was to dignified to put up with the way presidents are treated today.

We are 1 nation in name only. We have always been two different nations, divided by geography and politics, and industry vs agriculture, city vs country.

 

[editec]

So, Lincoln totally violates the Constitution,

No he didn't.

tramples on states rights rights,

No, he didn't.

suspends habeus corpus,

True,

I'd go for Washington over Lincoln, though.

We need somebody with good values who can inspire other men to be better than their personal inclinations would otherwise lead them.

|That's Washington, if anyone.

 

[Charles_Main]

No he didn't.

The supreme court would disagree with you.

No, he didn't.

on this I would agree, the only state right he trampled was the right to leave the union, and I do not think that was ever there right.

True,

Yes, but then he had that right, It is right there in the constitution. When in times of war, or rebellion. I think the Civil war qualified as a rebellion

The actual argument was not if it can be suspended, but if it could be done by the President, or if it had to be done by congress.

 

[Tech_Esq]

The supreme court would disagree with you.



on this I would agree, the only state right he trampled was the right to leave the union, and I do not think that was ever there right.




Yes, but then he had that right, It is right there in the constitution. When in times of war, or rebellion. I think the Civil war qualified as a rebellion

The actual argument was not if it can be suspended, but if it could be done by the President, or if it had to be done by congress.

Y'all Yankees need to stop this discussion right about here. There are two views on what was right and what was wrong about President Lincoln's actions and what rights states maintained after the signing of the Constitution. There was a fairly significant line of jurisprudence being established around the 10th Amendment up to the late 19th century when the Supremes flip-flopped on themselves and over-turned the whole line of cases (as they should do now by over-turning Darby v. US, but I digress.

If you want this thread to stay about Washington and Lincoln, discussion of Lincoln's prosecution of the war should probably end about here.

 

[Charles_Main]

Y'all Yankees need to stop this discussion right about here. There are two views on what was right and what was wrong about President Lincoln's actions and what rights states maintained after the signing of the Constitution. There was a fairly significant line of jurisprudence being established around the 10th Amendment up to the late 19th century when the Supremes flip-flopped on themselves and over-turned the whole line of cases (as they should do now by over-turning Darby v. US, but I digress.

Obviously there are 2 views on it. I was just stating mine.

If you want this thread to stay about Washington and Lincoln, discussion of Lincoln's prosecution of the war should probably end about here.

Yeah maybe someone should start a thread about it, but then isn't it relevant since we are talking about if Lincoln or Washington would make a good president today. I mean I kinda think to answer that question you have to at least think about what each man did as president, No?

 

[Shogun]

ther was a thread not too long ago about it... dunno where it went.. but it was interesting.

 

[Nemo Securus]

Washington all the way. If this country was still set up the way Washington and his buddy's had envisioned it to be we would have a utopia.