Who was the most divisive President in history?

Who is the most divisive President?

  • Reagan

    Votes: 4 4.0%
  • Nixon

    Votes: 10 9.9%
  • LBJ

    Votes: 5 5.0%
  • JFK

    Votes: 3 3.0%
  • Truman

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • FDR

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • Wilson

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • Jackson

    Votes: 4 4.0%
  • Lincoln

    Votes: 50 49.5%
  • Other?

    Votes: 19 18.8%

  • Total voters
    101

Edric Streona

Ad Honorem
Feb 2016
4,529
Japan
Has to be Lincoln. Can any one be more decisive than a civil war? The cause was just and probably inevitable but he was an instigating cause of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: benzev
Oct 2019
124
West Virginia
But did Lincoln cause or start the Civil War? He consistently preached unity, the indivisibility of the nation.

The divisiveness of that time came entirely from the South, from the slavers. Blaming Lincoln for it is playing into the hands of the "Lost Cause" Confederate propagandists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tulius

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
6,122
Portugal
But did Lincoln cause or start the Civil War? He consistently preached unity, the indivisibility of the nation.

The divisiveness of that time came entirely from the South, from the slavers. Blaming Lincoln for it is playing into the hands of the "Lost Cause" Confederate propagandists.
From the info that I have from the period, that seems basically correct.
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,738
Republika Srpska
But did Lincoln cause or start the Civil War? He consistently preached unity, the indivisibility of the nation.

The divisiveness of that time came entirely from the South, from the slavers. Blaming Lincoln for it is playing into the hands of the "Lost Cause" Confederate propagandists.
Doesn't make Lincoln not divisive. He was the President during whose mandate half of the country seceded.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
6,122
Portugal
Doesn't make Lincoln not divisive. He was the President during whose mandate half of the country seceded.
Undeniable. But the question is, was he the cause of it, ot the divison was already there? On the other hand there were presidents that caused (built) divisions.
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,738
Republika Srpska
The South was seceding the moment a Republican became President.
 

Chlodio

Forum Staff
Aug 2016
4,723
Dispargum
Both definitions of divisive are valid - did a president cause the division or was he just a symbol of preexisting division? As far as Lincoln goes, so long as the White House was occupied by a president friendly to the South the debate over slavery would not have erupted into civil war. That still leaves us with the question, 'Did Lincoln cause the Civil War, or was the war caused by the voters who elected him (or feared him)?' I blame the voters on both sides, although that's not a very satisfying answer.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
6,122
Portugal
The South was seceding the moment a Republican became President.
Both definitions of divisive are valid - did a president cause the division or was he just a symbol of preexisting division? As far as Lincoln goes, so long as the White House was occupied by a president friendly to the South the debate over slavery would not have erupted into civil war. That still leaves us with the question, 'Did Lincoln cause the Civil War, or was the war caused by the voters who elected him (or feared him)?' I blame the voters on both sides, although that's not a very satisfying answer.
Trying to explicit better my question: Can a person be divisive if the division predates his existence?

I think the answer is “yes” if he infatuates that division, “no” if he doesn’t. Anyway ranking him as the most divisive, must be consider only the part that he infatuates, not the all already existing division. Naturally this reasoning is valid for Lincoln and for all the others.
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,738
Republika Srpska
The division between the North and the South certainly existed, but it was Lincoln's election that made that division much, much more real and bloody.