4 reasons Abraham Lincoln wouldn't win the GOP nomination in 2012

Yes, Abraham Lincoln was America's first Republican president, and, yes, the GOP proudly calls itself the Party of Lincoln. But Bradley University sociology chair Jackie Hogan wonders: Could Lincoln win his party’s nomination in 2012? Considers his stance on some of the hot-button issues in the Republican primary race.

5. Parts of Lincoln's record still might score well among parts of today's GOP electorate

Lincoln’s record would serve him well among some segments of today’s electorate, however.

He was critical of interventionist foreign wars (which would no doubt win him points among Ron Paul supporters).

He also took several actions to curtail civil liberties in the name of national security. During the Civil War he implemented military tribunals for civilians, suspended habeas corpus, and authorized indefinite detention of persons deemed to pose a security risk to the nation (policies that would appeal to defenders of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp).

And he was a longtime supporter of "colonization," an assisted migration scheme to encourage blacks to leave America for colonies in AfricaCentral America, and elsewhere – a policy that would likely track well among supporters of "self-deportation" for illegal immigrants.

So could Abraham Lincoln win the 2012 GOP nomination? As commentators are fond of observing, in this dizzyingly mercurial primary race, anything is possible. Perhaps the more important question, however, is whether Mr. Lincoln would want the nomination.

Jackie Hogan is chair of Sociology at Bradley University in Peoria, Ill. and author of “Lincoln, Inc.: Selling the Sixteenth President in Contemporary America.”

5 of 5

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.