On the old issues of ex-slave's rights, and even non-white women...?

I wouldn't blame him personally for it.

There's only so fast you can liberalize a society before the people reject you entirely. He probably did as much as it was conceivably possible to do. And it still got him killed.

First off, I can't really make much sense of your question. Don't know if you are referring to the abysmal failure of reconstruction to achieve its stated goals, as contextualizing this question by granting primacy to the issues relevant to "ex slave's rights" would indicate. Or rather what was alluded to in the following quote, which is quite telling in regard to Lincoln's true priorities. As for the relevance of any of this specifically to non-white women, well, that escapes me entirely. As does the definition of "seat of power." Got me there.

Anyway, the quote:

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing a single slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union."

--Abraham Lincoln

It should also be noted that immigrants, notably from Ireland, were, from the mid-1800's to the turn of the century, arguably treated much worse even than were slaves, being subjected to the most ruthless exploitation during a time when capitalism had no governors whatsoever. I feel this always bears mentioning when one is confronted with the historical notion that the North has a legitimate claim to the moral high ground before, during and after the war between the states, and it's attendant preachiness. And this vicious mistreatment continued roughly fifty years after the abolition of slavery.

It was common for instance, to use immigrants rather than slaves for the most hideous and dangerous tasks, even before the aforementioned termination of slavery, simply because slaves cost a great deal of money, and starving immigrants cost nothing.

But did Lincoln do harm or good? I suppose a person of conscience is led inescapably to conclude it was the latter, if for no other reason than the lofty rhetoric in the constitution was a hollow sham as long as one human being was allowed legal ownership of another. But as the quote makes obvious, the obviation and termination of this state of affairs did not provide the primary impetus for Lincoln's efforts, and was in truth incidental to his overarching goal,

All this was just a matter of time, rights for minorities and rights for woman. Why? Because its only just a matter of time before your great idea of slavery blows up in your face.......look at all civilizations that had slaves and repressed others.....revolt, wars, death, murders. We learned from these events. Which is why we are just as hesitant now, as then to do such a stupid thing........IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF TIME.....LINCOLN JUST HAD THE BALLS TO DO IT.

If the south won the war....im sure there would still be unrest to this day........many deaths

I think President Abraham Lincoln did more GOOD than harm. If it weren't for Abraham Lincoln there might still be slaves and Non - whites wouldn't have much rights. Abraham Lincoln changed the face of history. We should be thankful for he was elected as president.

No he had to deal with a corrupt government with Scalawags and Carpetbaggers who had ulterior motives during the Reconstruction era. Most of the rights awarded were given with nefarious intentions and women's were delayed but it all worked out in the end.

Unfortunately, change has to be gradual, and that's why it took another hundred years before blacks were truly recognized as equals. I think Lincoln did the most he could possibly do.

no