Teddy.
I didn’t realize I had missed so many rounds, and maybe the order would be slightly different, but given the three left, it’s gotta be #1 and #16 for the showdown. Washington was the only man, in an age of giants, who could make the presidency.
Phew. Tough one. I’m gonna throw in a **Lincoln **vote purely on emotional grounds, although I think Teddy will go this round.
Maybe I’ve been living in Dixie too long, but I’ll vote for Lincoln. The Civil War was probably unavoidable, but Lincoln may have been able to negotiate a peaceful solution more quickly without the years of battles and bloodshed that ocurred. Also, if he had been better at selecting more competent generals at the beginning of the way it would have ended much more quickly. His inability to find good leadership prolonged the the most deadly war in American history.
So, okay. He’s probably my favorite president, but I have to vote for Honest Abe Lincoln.
I’ll give you the difficulty in finding competent generals, but one of Lincoln’s virtues was to acknowledge their limitations and get them out of there. Kennedy and Johnson never managed this.
Further, if you think Lincoln should have been able to negotiate a peaceful solution with the CSA without granting them severance, you’ve studied a different war than I have.
Teddy
I didn’t phrase that right - I meant, he could have ended the war more quickly. I don’t think he could have avoided it completely.
Once begun, the war could only have ended by either the complete military destruction of the South’s forces, or by acknowledging secession. You really think that the war could have been won more quickly than it was?
Yeah. The Union fought the first year of the war with one hand tied behind their back.
I’m not saying Lincoln was incompetent; he was remarkable at a very critical point in the country’s history. I’m just looking for reasons to vote for one of the final three and there aren’t many. Lincoln oversaw the costliest war in our history; and although he was successful at keeping the country together, he made some early mistakes that dragged the war out. Much of the fault lies with the Generals, but the buck stops at the White House.
TR
I have enormous respect for Theodore Roosevelt, and take nothing away from his many accomplishments, but now that we’re down to the final three there’s no way he comes out ahead of Washington and Lincoln.
T.R.
Teddy’s now pretty close to a 10-vote lead, but since we’re in the final 3, I’m not going to mercy-rule anyone; Thursday at 2 will stand as the deadline.
And as I count it, the vote stands thus:
Roosevelt: 13
Washington: 4
Lincoln: 3
This next round is going to be a bear.
Whoops, forgot about the morning vote count. In any case, by a count of 13 to 4 to 3, Theodore Roosevelt is voted out; not for his own faults, but due to the virtues of the two men remaining.
George Washington (None, 1789-1797)
Abraham Lincoln (Republican, 1861-1865)
Eliminated Presidents:
Need to get some work done, so I’ll post and run.
Voting to eliminate George Washington.
Voting, and the game, closes on Monday at 2 PM unless there’s significant demand for an extension.
Lincoln
Washington. Both men were indispensable, but I think Lincoln had the tougher job.
I won’t be disappointed with either result (true of last round also) but voting for Lincoln.
Yes, both men were indispensable in their respective times, but Washington had the tougher job. The Framers wrote Art. II with him in mind, as he sat there before them in Philadelphia, but really no one knew how the president of a large republic would do his job. No one knew what role he should play in the adoption of legislation, or how he should deal with the heads of the executive departments, or conduct foreign policy… or… or anything. There was no precedent for it.
Washington practically invented the job and did it brilliantly. He got the infant nation up on its feet, served a second term with great reluctance when both Jefferson and Hamilton (odd political bedfellows if ever there were) convinced him he had to, and left after eight years, giving up power that a lesser man would’ve hung onto. He had kept the peace, steered clear of the ongoing wars between Great Britain and France, and laid the groundwork for prosperity. A million things could’ve gone wrong. The young U.S. could’ve failed for any number of reasons in those first eight years, but it didn’t - and he deserves much of the credit.
We would not have the country we do, were it not for Washington. I’ve argued his merits earlier in this thread. And consider this: George III, who had no reason to love him, had earlier asked what the Virginian would do at the end of the Revolution. Benjamin West, a painter who knew them both, said he supposed Washington would return to his farm. The king exclaimed, “If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world!”
Lincoln was a great man, too, and saved the Union when perhaps no one else could. But he made a lot of mistakes, some of which were nearly fatal to his cause, and he was tragically killed before he had to deal with the massive headaches that would have come with Reconstruction. He was able to draw upon the massive military and economic resources of the North in a war which, although its outcome was not preordained, really was his to lose. I place him just a whisker or two behind Washington, but second nevertheless.
Lincoln, although it gives me no pleasure to say so.
Lincoln is my vote, simply due to the fact he is up against Washington.
Washington was working from no blueprint whatsoever and he could have been a President for life, but he realized what was at stake and truly earned the name Father of our Country.
I underrated Washington for a long time, but I still won’t rank him above Lincoln.
In an earlier post, I held off voting against Thomas Jefferson because, without his action in making the Louisiana Purchase, I would not be sitting here as an American. The same can probably be said of Lincoln, and he may be due even more credit. In 1860, James Buchanan vetoed the first iteration of the Homestead Act. In 1862, Lincoln signed it, facilitating the settlement of the west by numerous small farmers and, by extension, small-to-large merchants, as opposed to wealthy plantation owners served by slaves or unlanded laborers.
What we lose sight of in evaluating Lincoln’s anti-slavery is his economic reasoning in addition to his ethical rhetoric. Slavery is an economics of poverty–only those at the top, free or slave, have any reasonable economic opportunity. The real impact of Lincoln’s work goes beyond freeing the slaves and preserving the union. Washington’s precedents were invaluable, but Lincoln’s policies, I would reckon, were more influential in the development of the US as a great nation.
I didn’t vote to eliminate Jefferson, Madison, and others when I felt their non-presidential accomplishments should be considered along with their White House years. Accordingly, I feel that Washington’s military career tips the balance in his favor. Although his term was arguably not greater than Honest Abe’s, George was the greater man.
The two top seeds made it to the final, but there can only be one ultimate winner.