Lincoln was first elected with about 39% of the popular vote meaning he was opposed by more than 60% of the voters. Many thought he won a rigged election due to the fact that in several states he wasn't even on the ballot and got no votes at all. His election led to the worst division this country has seen to date with the secession of the southern states and the start of Civil War.
For the next election, Lincoln didn't even secure his own party nomination and had to form a new party called the National Union party. In this election, only the northern and western states, where Lincoln was very popular, were allowed to vote. Still, he only secured just over half of the popular vote.
Yes, I believe Lincoln was the most divisive president to date. I also believe the country was at a point where this division was necessary to bring about the changes and unity that followed, though it's my opinion that his assassination did more to unify the country than most of the things he said or did. Unfortunately, the divisions also deprived the country of the greatness that could have been if Lincoln had actually had the support of the country.
Although we all saw it through the different lenses of our own life experiences, we all lived through the same 8 years. If you failed to see any divisiveness when it was happening, nothing I can say will make you see it now. I'll let it suffice to say that those in control have us exactly where they want us. The division works for them. As long as we are supporting our teams and fighting against each other we'll never fight for each other. If we were to ever fight together, for each other, who knows?
That's stupid way to look at is because you're ignoring that was in a 4 way race where he had over 10% more votes than the 2nd closest (and absolutely steamrolled all 3 in the electoral college). Many people thought black people weren't human beings or equal to white people and a whole bunch of other stupid things, so "some people thought" means nothing. The funny part is that sounds a hell of a lot like the South tried to rig the election
against him. That wasn't his fault. The South literally started the Civil War and were the ones instigating the violence the whole way up until the North had no choice but to go to war. Laying the blame for that on Lincoln is absurd.
Yeah, that's because War Democrats joined with Republicans and formed the National Union Party as a symbol of unity. There was zero chance Lincoln wasn't going to be the Republican candidate (some Republicans initially threw a fit and nominated Fremont, but he later withdrew and then supported Lincoln). WTF if you're gonna spout history know your fucking shit and stop trying to deliberately mislead people. Its not because OMG even the Republicans didn't like Lincoln, it was an attempt at unifying more voters (many of which wouldn't vote Republican out of principle; sounds like something that the Democrats should try this next election frankly).
That's stupid logic.
He wasn't divisive, he just happened to be President during the most divisive period in the Country's history. Being divisive and just being there when things are divisive is not the same thing.
I don't, his assassination was likely why the country didn't actually heal after the war as it put things in limbo on how the country would unify.
That's not what anyone said. They said that Obama was not the one pushing that divisiveness, which is a very different thing. Your logic here is astoundingly stupid. Just like with Lincoln, Obama was not the divisive one, he just was President during a divisive time because the
actual divisive assholes were so enraged by him that they resorted to what could be called outright treason to try and further divide the country. If you can't see that then you need some new goddamned lenses.