Given the time and what he has to deal with I agree. Lincoln is credited with a lot he didn't do. For example; near the end of the war but not quite it the union needed more bodies on the line. Most white men were worn out, so Lincoln though 'black men.' That was why he freed the slaves. Kind of a footnote, it was never really his intent. The civil war was a question of state's sovereignty or government sovereignty, I still think it should have been state's but I'm not in a position to do much about it.

Actually, Lincoln was not such a great president. By the time he was assassinated, the "medicine", which was mercury, he used daily for treatment of his depression, was destroying his brain.

Lincoln will probably be forever known as the "Great Emancipator" because of the Emancipation Proclamation that did not free all slaves."That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom.

"The principle [of the Proclamation] is not that a human being cannot justly own another," the London Spectator observed on October 11, 1862, "but that he cannot own him unless he is loyal to the northern states" government. As Lincoln stated in a famous, August 22, 1862 letter to New York Tribune editor Horace Greeley, "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that."

Lincoln may have "saved" the Union in a geographic sense, but his war destroyed the union defined as a voluntary association of states. Forcing a state to remain in the union at gunpoint renders that state a conquered province, not a genuine partner. We have not yet recovered from his war.

So, is President Trump "better" than Lincoln....you bet your sweet bippy! Democrats want rid of President Trump for holding up your money, confiscated by our government under the pretense of enriching American lives, to be given away to foreign governments. How would those same Democrats respond to Lincoln's actions? During the war Lincoln established a number of tyrannical precedents, including unconstitutionally conducting a war without the consent of Congress; suspending habeas corpus; conscripting railroads and censoring telegraph lines; imprisoning without trial some 30,000 northern citizens for merely voicing opposition to the war; deporting a member of Congress, Clement L. Vallandigham of Ohio, for opposing Lincoln’s income tax proposal; shutting down hundreds of Northern newspapers and imprisoning their editors for questioning his war policies; ordering federal troops to intimidate voters; and intentionally waging war against civilians.

I loved Lincoln as a young man but as I learned about the things in your last paragraph he lost a lot of my previous admiration. I can only offer one excuse for him. In the beginning, the North was losing big time. He had to do something and getting rid of Gen. McClellan(?) was his first good move. I think even if the South had won we would have reconciled later, Southerners are just more gracious than the Northerners and everyone likes to make money as capitalist and the North had the factories and industrial base. Glad slavery was abolished. There isn't much difference between slavery and an indentured servant, but what difference there is, is really huge.