I am no great fan of Lincoln as a President. If we use the contextual argument, in the same way as we do with Jefferson and Washington-I don't see it the same. Lincoln pushed for the income tax, the draft, Legal Tender Laws-so he could print money. The whole point of the civil war was to end slavery and then you institute a DRAFT?
Ron Paul was ridiculed roundly for saying that the North could have just bought out all of the slaves in the South for much less money and certainly saving 620,000 lives. They probably could have even paid 10x the market value. Lincoln never considered pursuing this avenue to my knowledge. It would have been the most moral way of looking at the issue. There was considerable executive over-reach that spurred the secession of many states, and in order to be recognized as a great leader -it should not be about the ability to use force.