Lincoln and Hamlin?

[HerbS]

Today,I saw a Lincoln-Hamlin-American Flag campaign poster in a local museum! What are some of your thoughts on the term of Hamlin?

[LincolnMan]

I don't think Lincoln had ever met Hamlin until after the election. They did things quite differently back then!

[RJNorton]

Herb, in 2008 Time Magazine did a series on what the magazine termed "America's worst vice-presidents." Hamlin was included in the list.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/pa...36,00.html

[Eva Elisabeth]

Here's some more about their "relationship" (you'll probably know the site, but it's just nicely done):
http://www.mrlincolnswhitehouse.org/resi...1809-1891/

[HerbS]

Thanks everyone! You have given me facts and supported my opinion of Hamlin!This reminds me of my mentor[Albert Castel]stating," A man had 2 sons,one became a sea captain,one became vice-pres of the U.S.-both went off and were never heard from again."There is a positive fact about Hamlin-we have a small town,near here,named after him!

[LincolnMan]

(03-19-2016 07:34 AM)HerbS Wrote:  Thanks everyone! You have given me facts and supported my opinion of Hamlin!This reminds me of my mentor[Albert Castel]stating," A man had 2 sons,one became a sea captain,one became vice-pres of the U.S.-both went off and were never heard from again."There is a positive fact about Hamlin-we have a small town,near here,named after him!

Thanks for the great quote Herb!

[HerbS]

No truer words were ever spoken about the power,or lack there of,of the vice president!But,the vp does have to step in when they are called upon!Case in point-T.Roosevelt and A.Johnson!

[Gene C]

I wonder if Aaron Burr had much to do with the diminished role of VP?

[RJNorton]

"I do not propose to be buried until I am dead." — Daniel Webster, turning down the Vice-Presidency in 1839.

[Wild Bill]

I wonder if there is not more to the dropping of Hamlin than what the usual historians say. I believe that it concerns Lincoln and Reconstruction, a theme cut short by his assassination. Hamlin was a Radical Republican.

In 1864, the Radicals challenged Lincoln and his "soft" Reconstruction of the South 3 ways: Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase ran independently; the radicals also split off rom Lincoln with their so-called Radical Democracy, running John Charles Fremont, the 1865 party standard bearer; and then the Radicals sent the much harsher Reconstruction program, the Wade Davis Bill. Lincoln was saved by Sherman taking Atlanta and then Sheridan's fall victories in the Shenandoah.

Andrew Johnson was a Reconstructor of Tennessee under the Lincoln Ten Percent Plan and a loyal Democrat who appealed to all such "War" Democrats, across party lines. So Lincoln ran as a National Union Party man. This left out Hamlin, a confirmed Radical throughout the war. This is not to say that Lincoln would be the South's best friend after the war had he lived. This is to say that Johnson showed that Lincoln's Reconstruction, no matter what it was, was achievable, and he did not yet want to be pinned down to any particular plan, nor even his own.

I have a paper on Lincoln's Reconstruction that looks into his real ideas, and they do not necessarily mean that he would have had a easy Reconstruction that might have pleased the South after the war. Remember, whatever problems Johnson had with the Radical Republicans, he was a Democrat. Lincoln was a Republican and he would not have had Johnson's disadvantages with Congress in the long run.

Typed without my glasses, so bear with me!

[RJNorton]

Looks good to me, Bill.

I believe, over the years, I have read (in various sources) three different scenarios on how Johnson was selected for VP at the convention:

A. Johnson was picked without any contact with Lincoln.
B. Johnson was selected, and then Lincoln gave his personal approval.
C. Hamlin was dropped, and Johnson was selected per Lincoln's instruction.

Any thoughts?

[ELCore]

(03-20-2016 11:33 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Looks good to me, Bill.

I believe, over the years, I have read (in various sources) three different scenarios on how Johnson was selected for VP at the convention:

A. Johnson was picked without any contact with Lincoln.
B. Johnson was selected, and then Lincoln gave his personal approval.
C. Hamlin was dropped, and Johnson was selected per Lincoln's instruction.

Any thoughts?

Burlingame (p. 642 in Volume II paperback) quotes Hay that Lincoln expressly declined to support any individual publicly for VP because he was friendly with all those being considered and friendly with their various supporters, but privately expressed his personal preference to keep Hamlin.

[Wild Bill]

I go with "C" Roger.

As to the Hay statement, Lincoln always said stuff like that so he had flexibility to act as he pleased and when he pleased

[L Verge]

I have no good background in Lincoln studies, but I have always considered him a master politician (and manipulator). Personally, I cannot see him sitting back and letting someone else choose the VP that he would have to work with to complete the war and begin Reconstruction.

It appears from what I have read that Hamlin had been pretty much of a waste in the job. Despite Burlingame's assessment, would Lincoln really want four more years of working with (or ignoring) him? And yes, I know that Johnson started out shaky with Lincoln also. Didn't Johnson have his military governorship of Tennessee working for him, however?

[Wild Bill]

Hamlin was always pushing for more black emancipation and the use of black troops. Lincoln fired Cameron for this (plus his corruption) and recalled the orders of Fremont in Missouri and Hunter in SC for using blacks as soldiers "prematurely." Hamlin may have fallen to the same axe in the end.

---

as Murray Rothbard once said, "Lincoln was a master politician, which means that he was a consummate conniver, manipulator, and liar." One not read that as a criticism but as a virue in politics