More handpicked essays just for you.
What are some short term consequences of the civil war
What are some short term consequences of the civil war
What are some short term consequences of the civil war
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
How should history view Rutherford B. Hayes: hero or villain? Explain. Rutherford Hayes the 19th President of the United States didn’t win the popular vote but, “was elected president after a partisan Electoral commission awarded him all of the electoral votes in dispute.” Hayes appears to have a good personality and to have good intentions for the country. It Also seems that he has a very good reputation for honesty.
James. M Pherson really knows his facts about president Abraham Lincoln. He focused more on Lincoln’s efforts to win the war instead of the other political things he accomplished during his presidency. Lincoln was a great commander-in-chief because he attempted to run the war and also maintain political stability at the same time. This was impressive because although he had no military experience, he was persistent in provoking his commanders to stay active and to always strive for victory.
General Ulysses S. Grant had a great impact on the United States both in his time as a war general and in his time as president. His role in the Civil War was instrumental to the Union victory and the strategies he employed saved many union troops and ended the war quickly. He had many wins, but also many losses and setbacks that were devastating. He learned and adapted through those setbacks and won the war and the American public. The United States would have had a much harder time winning the war and with recovery efforts afterward were it not for General Grant.
Abraham Lincoln would lead the Republican Party even though he did not win the south over in the election. He promised that he would save the Union no matter what the cost. This disconnect in policy would later lay the basis for the Civil War, which started in 1861. He never envisioned a proclamation or ending slavery but he was ultimately committed to saving the Union from the succeeding south. Lincoln gave into the antislavery Republicans toward the end of the war and finally decided to make slavery the true basis of the war.
The leadership and legacy of Ulysses S Grant Ulysses was born on April 27, 1822 and died on July 23, 1885. He was born in Point Pleasant, Ohio. Ulysses helped America win the Civil War and stop slavery. An interesting fact about Ulysses S. Grant was that his real name was Hiram Ulysses Grant. This war contributor was important to America because without him leading us in war it is possible that we would have lost the war which could cause us to still have slaves today.
While he was posted at Fort Humboldt, California he his commander was Robert Buchanan who was still angry about their argument at West Point. Buchanan spent a lot of time spreading rumours of Grant’s drinking to try and destroy Grant’s career. Eventually, because of the malicious rumors Grant resigned from the army and tried to work several different jobs. In the end his job did not work out so when the Civil War broke out he rejoined the Union Army. Grant’s alcoholism was an attribute that actually made him a better leader.
Abraham Lincoln, looking back, seems like an integral person to America and its history. People today may believe that, but it was actually surprisingly difficult for Lincoln to win his reelection. There were many factors contributing to this uncertainty, one of them being his support of emancipation for slaves. According to USHistory.org, the Democratic Party was split right down the middle about their hopes for the war. Half of the democrats were extremely dead-set on ending the war with a peace treaty, and the other half wanted to continue the fight ("The Election of 1864").
My paper topic is about analyzing the leadership of President Ulysses S. Grant in the 1800s. First, I would focus on the background of President Ulysses S. Grant. Secondly, I would focus on his nomination for the presidency. Thirdly, I would focus on President Grant’s tenure such as relations with the public and media, leadership of Congress, and the management of the bureaucracy. Lastly, I would compare and contrast what several scholars had said about the nature of President Grant’s leadership.
The candidates in the presidential campaign of the year 1868 included two men, Ulysses S. Grant and Horatio Seymour. During these times, there was only two political parties: the Democratic and Republican party. Ulysses S. Grant represented the republican party and Horatio Seymour represented the democrat party. The issues that occurred during the presidential campaign were….
General Ulysses S. Grant was a very powerful man. He was the son of a tanner on the Western frontier. He wasn’t born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He was very modern, and thought you had to work hard no matter what. Grant was a man that did not live in the past.
Andrew Jackson was from the west, and not a politician making him more of a common man than previous presidents. Serving in the military, being manly, and having a nickname “Old Hickory” made him relatable to the people. Presidents like George Washington, in contrast, came across as other worldly with their wealth, and education. The similarities to Jackson encouraged civilian participation in government. Coinciding with universal white male suffrage that came about in the 1820’s, the percentage of eligible voters that cast a ballot was higher in the 1828 election than any previous election.
Being an effective leader should not be judge on if the actions were morally correct or not but how the leader effected others. Andrew Jackson was a very effective leader, his decisions now are not viewed as morally correct but if he was not an exceptional leader he would have not been able to convince so many individuals to go along with his plans.
What Makes an Effective Leader? There are leaders all around you and you probably did not even know it. A leader is a person who leads or commands a group, organization, or country. This could be parents, teachers, or the president of a country.
Being a good leader does not necessarily mean shining in the spotlight. Some of the most revolutionary and successful leaders are the ones who worked the lights. Self-awareness, self-direction, vision, ability to motivate, and social awareness are the characteristics of a good leader according to SIY Leadership Institute (SIYLI). There have been many accomplished and renowned leaders in America since (and before) the 1770’s, ones whose names are universally known and others who are unfamiliar. Of the latter is Alexander Hamilton, who showed potential since the minute he was put on earth, for no matter what obstacles were thrown in his way he forged ahead and never threw away his shot.
A prospective U.S. President must have many important qualities in order to be successful. In my opinion, the most important quality that a president must have is leadership. The U.S. president must be able to run the country and know how delegate. Another quality that a president should have is good decision making skills. He or she needs to be able to make important decisions under pressure.
