Politics Who is the best Republican president between Donald Trump and Abraham Lincoln? (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
yankeesince59 said:
I have to assume that Marz is part of the "53%" ?
Click to expand...

I am not exactly sure what the 53 is. But I am serious in rating Lincoln as the absolute worst President because of the result of his actions. More American dead than by his actions of any other President.
 
MarAzul said:
Come on now. Federal troops did not occupy Sumter until after SC seceded. The South did no war like act until Lincoln pushed them into it. Just like if we occupied Corregidor again and sent a fleet to back them up.
The South would have left without a war. The natural progression of man would have eliminated Slavery on about the same schedule that it happen in the western world in the South as well no doubt.
Lincoln did not have the foresight to see beyond the brim of his tall hat! He went to war, provoked what was not needed. Killing more Americans than any other war ever has by a wide margin.

He damn well should have just let them go, just like I would hope we let California go if they wish. Take them back when they come to their senses.

Btw
His oath it to;
"preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
not the country.

A huge fail.
Click to expand...

They occupied Moultrie which was in shambles. They moved to the abandoned Sumter, again before Lincoln took office.

The South attacked 1st. Jefferson Davis and the confederacy wanted war. They were waiting for any excuse. They fired the first shots. Again Lincoln did not want war. The confederacy did and they got it.

The president must do his damdest to protect the constitution and the country it pertains to. A constitution without a country is just a piece of paper with words on. The country, the people, give it meaning.
 
MarAzul said:
I am not exactly sure what the 53 is. But I am serious in rating Lincoln as the absolute worst President because of the result of his actions. More American dead than by his actions of any other President.
Click to expand...


The "53%" is found in the OP. And if you truly believe what you are claiming, you are completely lost.

Do seriously think the South was justified in what they were doing?...The Union was ultimately preserved. Have you even considered what the US and the world would be like today if Lincoln had allowed the Confederacy to simply break away from the union?
 
Chris Craig said:
A constitution without a country is just a piece of paper with words on. The country, the people, give it meaning.
Click to expand...

err, these sound like your words.

Mine are a bit different. This is a great country because of it's Constitution. A Constitution modifiable by the people but not by the whim of a majority.
 
yankeesince59 said:
Do seriously think the South was justified in what they were doing?..
Click to expand...

>>> What is the question here? Suceeding? Sure! Why not? It was not a functioning nation at that point. Seperation would allow them to progress to a natural improvement in the systems.

yankeesince59 said:
Have you even considered what the US and the world would be like today if Lincoln had allowed the Confederacy to simply break away from the union?
Click to expand...

>>> Yep, Slavery ended as an viable economic system in the Western World, mostly with out war. The South would have had to do deal with what does not work. I have not doubt they would have done so just as the rest of the Western world has done.
The fact that we had a war over it rather than a natural progression is probably still being felt today. I expect the Nation would have re united, probably around the period of WWII. An much better for a natural progression.

And then perhaps we would not have that stupid 14th amendment.
 
MarAzul said:
err, these sound like your words.

Mine are a bit different. This is a great country because of it's Constitution. A Constitution modifiable by the people but not by the whim of a majority.
Click to expand...

Who the hell do you think elected the "majority"?

Not sure what angle you're spinning now but "the people" themselves don't modify The Constitution but instead they elect representatives to do their bidding, which is exactly what a "Republic" is founded on.

C'mon Marz, you're better than this, or at least I thought you were.
 
MarAzul said:
>>> What is the question here? Suceeding? Sure! Why not? It was not a functioning nation at that point. Seperation would allow them to progress to a natural improvement in the systems.



>>> Yep, Slavery ended as an viable economic system in the Western World, mostly with out war. The South would have had to do deal with what does not work. I have not doubt they would have done so just as the rest of the Western world has done.
The fact that we had a war over it rather than a natural progression is probably still being felt today. I expect the Nation would have re united, probably around the period of WWII. An much better for a natural progression.

And then perhaps we would not have that stupid 14th amendment.
Click to expand...

You are merely speculating what would have unfolded, and that's all you have, speculation, period.

I seriously have no idea what kind of shit you have been smoking but Lincoln is not only not the worst POTUS ever, but by most every yardstick he is widely regarded by historians and others who are far more learned than you or I, as the very BEST ever.

What part of the "UNITED States of America" don't you understand?
 
yankeesince59 said:
"the people" themselves don't modify The Constitution but instead they elect representatives to do their bidding, which is exactly what a "Republic" is founded on.

C'mon Marz, you're better than this, or at least I thought you were.
Click to expand...

Of coarse we have a Republic. Not sure why you find need to point this out. Even so, it still takes a super majority to modify it, as it should.
 
MarAzul said:
Of coarse we have a Republic. Not sure why you find need to point this out. Even so, it still takes a super majority to modify it, as it should.
Click to expand...

Because you said, "A Constitution modifiable by the people ...........but........... not by the whim of a majority."

Maybe I misinterpreted your meaning ?...if so, I yield.
 
yankeesince59 said:
Lincoln is not only not the worst POTUS ever
Click to expand...
>>> Most people do disagree. That is fine if you do.
yankeesince59 said:
but by most every yardstick he is widely regarded by historians and others who are far more learned than you or I, as the very BEST ever.[/QUOTE
>>> Of course I have noticed this over the years, but them most people do not know the shit the man did, they just take the Carl Sandburg version as gospel.
yankeesince59 said:
You are merely speculating what would have unfolded, and that's all you have, speculation, period.
Click to expand...
>>> Naw not all speculation, most of the rest of the western world did not have to kill a huge percentage of their population to end an economic system that can not work. Men will work for their benefit, it requires the employer to find a way to benefit by understanding this reality and accommodate the natural desire of men.
Click to expand...
 
yankeesince59 said:
Because you said, "A Constitution modifiable by the people ...........but........... not by the whim of a majority."

Maybe I misinterpreted your meaning ?...if so, I yield.
Click to expand...
Thank you.
The interposer of Representatives works best for a nation. Even though it probably is not best for a tribe.

I cringe now that I think of my representative. I just today read the newsletter the dufus sent out.
 
Last edited:
MarAzul said:
>>> What is the question here? Suceeding? Sure! Why not? It was not a functioning nation at that point. Seperation would allow them to progress to a natural improvement in the systems.



>>> Yep, Slavery ended as an viable economic system in the Western World, mostly with out war. The South would have had to do deal with what does not work. I have not doubt they would have done so just as the rest of the Western world has done.
The fact that we had a war over it rather than a natural progression is probably still being felt today. I expect the Nation would have re united, probably around the period of WWII. An much better for a natural progression.

And then perhaps we would not have that stupid 14th amendment.
Click to expand...

Stupid 14th amendment? We built the enconomy, our country on the backs of African American slaves. They shouldn't be able to be a part of that country? Be free? Wtf man!
 
MarAzul said:
err, these sound like your words.

Mine are a bit different. This is a great country because of it's Constitution. A Constitution modifiable by the people but not by the whim of a majority.
Click to expand...

I agree this country is great because it's constitution. But without people to adhere to it, what is it? A piece of paper. Yes, and it should take a majority to modifiy it.

When the 11 southern states seceeded they did not take the constitution with them. They created their own. Lincoln as protector of our constitution was not beholden to them.
 
Chris Craig said:
We built the enconomy, our country on the backs of African American slaves. They shouldn't be able to apart of that country?
Click to expand...

>>> Oh horseshit! WTF are you going on about now? Who said they should be part of the country?
If we had not gone to war with the South, we would not have needed the 14th amendment. Somewhere along the way, the 13th is needed but not the 14th.

Chris Craig said:
Wtf man!
Click to expand...

>> Right! Wtf?
 
Chris Craig said:
I agree this country is great because it's constitution. But without people to adhere to it, what is it? A piece of paper. Yes, and it should take a majority to modifiy it.

When the 11 southern states seceeded they did not take the constitution with them. They created their own. Lincoln as protector of our constitution was not beholden to them.
Click to expand...

umm, Alright! I will take this as some sort of agreement.:cool2:
 
MarAzul said:
His oath it to;
"preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
not the country.

A huge fail.
Click to expand...


Quotes the constitution when it's logical to do so.
Ignores it when someone quotes it to him.
Just another day on sportstwo.com
 
MarAzul said:
>>> Oh horseshit! WTF are you going on about now? Who said they should be part of the country?
If we had not gone to war with the South, we would not have needed the 14th amendment. Somewhere along the way, the 13th is needed but not the 14th.



>> Right! Wtf?
Click to expand...

By calling the 14th amendment stupid you are saying they should not. Yes, we would have. African American slaves would then still not be citizens of this country. You would have had them all shipped back to Africa then? Should their decendents be shipped home too then?
 
MarAzul said:
>>> Most people do disagree. That is fine if you do.
Of course I have noticed this over the years, but them most people do not know the shit the man did, they just take the Carl Sandburg version as gospel.
Click to expand...

Marz, you're only speculating again. And when did you become so well versed on the Civil War and Lincoln that you somehow have more knowledge on the subject than people who have made their living from being experts on the subject as legit historians? And you claim that they are devoid of knowledge that you somehow possess? You assert that they "do not know the shit that Lincoln did" but you somehow do?...seriously?...C'mon man.

Again, you're putting your limited knowledge of Lincoln above those who are experts. So if you weren't fed the "Carl Sandburg version", where did you get your info? I would guess that it is from books/articles that are written by the very same people who have been educated on a higher level than the rest of us here and who are also very likely the very same people who rate Lincoln as the best POTUS.
 
yankeesince59 said:
Marz, you're only speculating again. And when did you become so well versed on the Civil War and Lincoln that you somehow have more knowledge on the subject than people who have made their living from being experts on the subject as legit historians? And you claim that they are devoid of knowledge that you somehow possess? You assert that they "do not know the shit that Lincoln did" but you somehow do?...seriously?...C'mon man.

Again, you're putting your limited knowledge of Lincoln above those who are experts. So if you weren't fed the "Carl Sandburg version", where did you get your info? I would guess that it is from books/articles that are written by the very same people who have been educated on a higher level than the rest of us here and who are also very likely the very same people who rate Lincoln as the best POTUS.
Click to expand...

Personal experience?
 
Chris Craig said:
African American slaves would then still not be citizens of this country
Click to expand...

Chris Craig said:
You would have had them all shipped back to Africa then?
Click to expand...

If we had not gone to war with the South, there would be no Slaves in what remained of the US. Thus the US would have no need for the 14th, as it already accepted free men born here as citizens.
The South would need to do what ever, but that would be of no consequence when we reunified. As I suspect we would have done, perhaps 75 years ago.

New states such as Oregon might have had some problems, as it still had laws that reflected the not so distant days of being a British Territory. But that had to work out in any case.
Oregon sort of went from being British to a US state in less than 10 years with black people excluded, even though a few were here and the 14th did not help them, as State law was the problem.
 
No way Trump is better than Lincoln not even close. Hard looking back to the 1st president to find a worse potus than Trump (except Nixon). Shit the 1st president was told in a letter from a colonel in his army he should be named King, and he said not no but hell no. Trump would have said yes I should be King.
 
MarAzul said:
If we had not gone to war with the South, there would be no Slaves in what remained of the US. Thus the US would have no need for the 14th, as it already accepted free men born here as citizens.
The South would need to do what ever, but that would be of no consequence when we reunified. As I suspect we would have done, perhaps 75 years ago.

New states such as Oregon might have had some problems, as it still had laws that reflected the not so distant days of being a British Territory. But that had to work out in any case.
Oregon sort of went from being British to a US state in less than 10 years with black people excluded, even though a few were here and the 14th did not help them, as State law was the problem.
Click to expand...

You truly think things would have just work themselves out and southern slave owners would have just one day said your all free, I can pick this cotton myself...or better yet I'll pay you to pick my cotton?

There are still people in the south today who would love to own slaves. The only reason slavery ended is because some one with the power to stop it did. The 14th ammendment fortfied the ex slaves as citizens and gave them the freedom of all other men here. It was neccessary and would have been needed one way or the other. If it were not etched into the constitution certain men would find motive to argue they are not citizens, have rights, etc.
 
Chris Craig said:
No way Trump is better than Lincoln not even close. Hard looking back to the 1st president to find a worse potus than Trump (except Nixon). Shit the 1st president was told in a letter from a colonel in his army he should be named King, and he said not no but hell no. Trump would have said yes I should be King.
Click to expand...

More likely,Trump would have said, "Hell, I am king".
 
Last edited:
yankeesince59 said:
Again, you're putting your limited knowledge of Lincoln above those who are experts
Click to expand...

Yep! I did study the issue in detail many years ago. Long story there, and I will spare you all.
But it still stands today as true what I point out to all of you and any "expert" that cares to give a shit.
1. There is nothing in the Constitution to give a President the authority to go to war to prevent a State from seceding
2.In choosing the path of war to prevent the South from seceding, it resulted in the death of more Americans as a result of that war than any other war in US history.
3.The rest of Western Civilization managed it's way to free the Slaves without killing a huge number of their population.

It is my opinion, with these huge negatives on Lincoln, without going into his massive transgressions against the Constitution, render him the worst President in US history based upon his own actions, and the results.

It is my view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top