Lincoln and Hamlin?

[L Verge]

(03-21-2016 03:47 PM)Gene C Wrote:  From what little I've read, there was serious concern that Johnson was a bit to forgiving and allowing former confederate leaders back into positions of responsibility in their local and state governments right after they had fought against their country. Johnson was tying the hands of the military that were trying to insure freed blacks were not persecuted and protecting what few new rights they had, and who were trying to punish confederate leaders at the same time.

Just like there were atrocities committee during the Civil War by both sides, same can be said for reconstruction.
We need to remember Lincoln was very unpopular up to six months before the end of the Civil War. Reconstruction probably wouldn't have added to his popularity much.
Whoever was going to be President was going to have a rough time of it.

Plus this was before the days of Stuckey's, Krispy Kreme doughnuts, Dixie Cups, Chick Fillet, the Dukes of Hazard, Claxton Fruit Cake, Coca Cola, Disney World, and Spring Break. It was a different world.
These institutions of the south might not exist without reconstruction. So maybe it wasn't a total loss after all.

You forgot Moon Pies! But great points!

Do you think that some of the Union politicians were wise enough to realize that they needed the Confederate leaders, who were very intelligent men, on their side in order to ensure better reconstruction of the defeated South?

Not only had the war destroyed the infrastructure and economics of the area, it had badly decimated the generation of educated men that would be needed to guide their own people through the turmoil and change. Instead, much of the process fell into the hands of the vengeful military, carpetbaggers, and the uneducated classes.