I am not going to attack you. I will not, however, admire a president who openly flouted the circuit court's ruling that his suspension of habeas corpus was unconstitutional, and who openly detained political opponents such as Clement Vallandigham and William Merrick. These are not the only reasons I disfavor Lincoln, but I find these offenses particularly egregious.

ditto.

ah hell, while I'm at it, I would also like to encourage people to actually READ the Gettysburg address. Then in doing so, when finding that it only pertained to certain states (most if not all were confederate so he wasn't even president of them), you may just want to re-think the whole "Lincoln freed the slaves" notion. (please note that I mean that in general and not to attack Steven's clever post) I assert that what really freed all slaves (white, black, hispanic, asian, and other) in America was the industrial revolution which essentially rendered them obsolete.

From what I understand from reading/studying History is that really what the Gettysburg address was, was Lincoln saying 'We won the war you know it, you will surrender soon'.

Grover Cleveland was a conscription dodger in the Civil War who later denied the promised pensions to Civil War veterans, he married the daughter of his friend about 30 years his junior, he arrested people who were demonstrating peacefully in favor of building roads, he was the first president to use troops on workers striking, he reneged on agreements made with Hawaiians. Cleveland was part of the corporatist movement that went too far to the right and caused the swing to the left in the second age of American government.

Every good president has done some unsavory things.

If you want to make an omelet, you're going to have to break a few eggs. That's why I say W. has had one of the best long term impacts, he has broken a shit load of eggs.

During the Civil War, the government in D.C. didn't acknowledge the secession. It wasn't recognized until after the war, so they could work on reintegration. Lincoln referencing those states was the official line of the time.

"he married the daughter of his friend about 30 years his junior. "

At least he did that. LOL. Nice work once again Steven

To be fair she was 21 and it was normal at the time for a man in his fifties to marry a young woman. Men of his class were expected to work through their youth, once they reached their rank and station in life then they would marry (or receive their prize). I guess when got elected president and married shortly after, he felt he reached the height of his career.

FDR! He defeated the depression and the nazis!

Cleveland paid for a substitute which was a legal alternative. The pensions were already denied by the Civil War Pension's Bureau because they were considered fraudulent. I could not care less whom he married. Cleveland simply enforced the court injunction. Cleveland also opposed the annexation of Hawaii.

Of course, there neither has been nor will be a perfect president. 

That's my point, if you weigh all the good and bad, then Lincoln is far from the worst. You must also include the impact the president had on the country after his reign. Lincoln had far more positive impact on the progression towards voluntary national unity, minority equality, and industrialization than he probably thought he would have.

Cleveland had much more negative long term impact. By using the military to enforce the judicial injunction, he caused a back lash that would lead to more government involvement in business and industry; even though that is not what he intended. If he had not done that, industrialist would have been more eager to pay fair wages and provide appropriate benefits that the market (the labor market) demanded. This would have been better for everyone than having government first restricting the power of the worker, then backtracking and overcompensating.

It's not a free market if the government is shooting and arresting demonstrators and strikers. That would be corporatism and leading to fascism; of course, it's not Fascism when we do it.

A free market system would demand that the government not get involved, and the business owners would then increase wages to get the workers they needed.