The Pros And Cons Of Andrew Jackson

Andrew Jackson, seventh president of the United States of America, can be debated as either a good president or bad president. But if one were to weigh out the positives and negatives of Andrew Jackson’s presidency, one would realize that his positives outweigh his negatives for a variety of historic facts. Andrew Jackson was a good president because he represented the majority of America’s people by being a common, prevented a civil war when South Carolina threatened to secede from the nation, and because he technically found or instigated the two major parties used in America today (Democratic and Republican). Many Jackson oppositionists despise him because of he is a hypocrite, however America was founded on hypocrisy so as an

Throughout Andrew Jackson’s eight years in office, many decisions he made were unsuccessful in helping our growing country continue to prosper. To this day, people still refer to him as King Andrew the First, seeing that many of his actions seemed like abuses of power. Though Jackson’s intentions had the common man in mind, the means by which he tried to please the common man, cast him as a king. Jackson’s abuse of power began when he passed the Indian Removal Act in 1830. This act authorized him to negotiate land exchanges with the Natives and led to treaties that paved the way for reluctant and forcible emigration of the Indians from their native lands.

Jackson was willing to make the unpopular decision of vetoing the renewal for the national bank and withdraw all the money to get our nation out of debt. Doing this made him very unpopular but Jackson was willing to take the risk to get the nation out of debt. Also when President Jackson became president he brought all of his friends with him, and gave them jobs, even me, using the spoils system. Incase you didn’t know the spoils system is when a president gets elected and he gives all of his friends and associates positions in office. As one of our best presidents Andrew Jackson also paved the road for us to continue on with manifest destiny by moving the Native Americans into Oklahoma so we could move farther west. While this may seem cruel to some he was doing what was best for our people and what he felt was best for the Native American population. President Jackson caringly thought of how the Native Americans would feel about themselves if they were surrounded by civilized people with foreign traditions to them. He was moving them for their own good, seeing as they never wanted to assimilate to our culture. Also, he feared that they would see themselves the way that they are truly seen, as savages, and he did not want to have to force that

In the history of America, the people have always had a mixed opinions or views with certain presidents on certain bills. Some presidents brought change, while others didn't which shows why not all presidents have a bill with their face on it. But the people have never felt more mixed about a president on a bill until Andrew Jackson took the 20. While Andrew Jackson has made a lot of positive gains in America there is still a lot of negative things and I think he shouldn't be on the bill at all. He has done way more harm than good such as he was still a murderer and a traitor symbol on America because of events he took in such as him making South Carolina stay in the union and pay taxes, him vetoing the pet banks, and he signed for the Trail of Tears.

Andrew Jackson’s presidency made him one of the most controversial presidents that has ever existed in the history of the United States of America. Andrew Jackson for many was a cruel tyrant who reinstated the tax on British goods with Tariff of 1828 and rejected the renewal of the charter for the Second National Bank of the United States. Also, Andrew Jackson created the Indian Removal Act of 1830 which end result would be the Trail of Tears during the presidency of Martin Van Buren. Those who oppose Andrew Jackson being the champion of the common man cite that Andrew Jackson abused his executive power of enforcing the law and the presidential veto. Andrew Jackson was misguided with some of the actions he made during his presidency, but he committed those actions because he thought they would help the common U.S. citizen. President Andrew Jackson used his executive power to be a champion of the common man during his presidency from 1828 to

Andrew Jackson has gone down as one of the best presidents in United States history and that’s because he did many great things to improve the United States. Throughout his presidency he constantly abused his power as the president and did many things that expanded the powers of the president. One of the biggest things that President Jackson did while in office was pass the Indian Removal Act. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 was when Jackson forced all the Indians to move to the land acquired in the Louisiana Purchase, while the Supreme Court declared this unconstitutional. Many of the Indians went peacefully, but many of the Indians also decided to protest and take it to the Supreme Court (Darrenkamp). While the court did side with the Indians Jackson and Congress forced the Indians to give up their land. The federal troops were called in to escort the Indians to their new land. Fifteen thousand Indians were forced to move and while on their way about a third of the Indians died, and this event became to be known as the Trail of Tears (Darrenkamp). Jackson had

Andrew Jackson was probably one of the most powerful and influential presidents during his time at the white house. He was hated, yet loved by many. Jackson was an American soldier, who gained fame as a general in the U.S and served in both houses of Congress. He was soon elected the seventh president of the United States. After Jackson took charge, he wanted immediate change as to how the government was being run. For starters, he came with a new idea of voting. Allowing the common people to vote for whom they believe was the right person for the job. Before the introduction to

America’s history is rich and full of countless heroes, scandals, and incredible stories. Perhaps one of the most interesting of those stories is that of Andrew Jackson’s. To some, he was a hero, but to others, he was their worst enemy. Being raised in the mountains of the Carolinas, he became the first “backcountry president” of the United States (Wilentz, 13). His fame, though, began years before his presidency.

When Jackson came to power in 1829 he promised much, advocating equality, democratic change, morality in government and true representation. However Jackson's success or failure as a president is shown by what he actually did. The thesis of this essay is that despite the variety of issues faced by Jackson he didn't actually bring about much change. This could be interpreted as failure but his legacy as a strong president, as a symbol of US democracy, and also the devotion of the people to him, does perhaps counter the failings. Failure might constitute not meeting one's promises but Jackson's ambiguity and inconsistency on many issues make it hard to judge his performance. I would not say he was completely successful or unsuccessful but

Growing up in the west, Jackson “fought Indians as a militia officer” (Tindall 331) and considered the removal of Indians his primary presidential priority (Tindall 333). In his statement regarding the Indian Removal Act of 1830, he argues that removal is necessary as it “puts an end to all possible danger of collision” between Indian tribes and the American slaves and reasons that removing Indians could potential lead to Indians “cast[ing] off their savage habits and becom[ing]n interesting, civilized, and Christian community” (Jackson). The basis of this argument relies entirely on whether the Indians were a savage and uncivilized community that posed a direct threat to the American government. Primarily, Dale Van Every, an American writer, argues that the “forces that led to removal did not come ... from the poor white frontiersmen who were the neighbors of the Indians. They came from industrialization … and the greed of businessmen” (Zinn 136). The tribes, therefore, did not pose threats to neighboring Americans but were rather simply an obstacle to the rapidly expanding American. Secondarily, many Native American tribes had actually become increasingly civilized (or increasingly American) by the passing of the act. A good example of a Native American tribe whose advancements were discredited by biased

Andrew Jackson was born on March 15, 1767 to Scots-Irish colonists Andrew and Elizabeth Hutchinson Jackson in the mountains between North and South Carolina. Jackson was born into poverty and as a result received very little education growing up. When The British invaded the Carolinas around 1780, Jackson’s mother and two brothers were killed during the conflict and British soldiers took the young Andrew Jackson prisoner, leaving him with a lifelong hostility toward Great Britain. In 1781, Jackson worked for a time in a saddle-maker 's shop. Later, he taught school and studied law in Salisbury, North Carolina. In 1787, he was admitted to the bar, and moved to Jonesborough. Jackson began working as a prosecuting attorney and later set up his own private practice. Shortly after he met and married Rachel Robards, the daughter of a local colonel.

Jackson’s removal policy did not sit well with a lot of groups; many were uncomfortable about it but agreed it had to be done. President Jackson showed great leadership apart from everything else, and handled the Indian Removal act when no one else wanted to address the growing issue of Indian problem. Most government officials saw little to gain from addressing this and would do nothing. Some historians believe the president’s motivation was clearly out of concern for the Indians customs, their culture and their language, but his first concern was the safety of the military, Indians occupying the east might jeopardize the defense of the United States.

One of the defining moments of President Andrew Jackson’s career, if not the most significant, was the Indian Removal Act of 1830. This was a controversial bill at the time and the impact from it is still felt today. The Indian Removal Act directly led to the displacement of thousands of Native Americans; including four thousand deaths during the Trail of Tears, the forced march from Georgia to Oklahoma. While overt racism played a clear role in relocating Native Americans past the Mississippi, it is possible that other factors were at play. The living conditions in many of the states were poor for Natives and Jackson hoped that giving them a new location to live could remedy these problems while opening the land up for white settlers.

Andrew Jackson was the seventh president, serving from 1829-1837. Nicknamed "Old Hickory," he left an indelible imprint on the nation that extends beyond his face adorning the twenty dollar bill. Jackson split the preexisting Republican Party into the Whig and Democratic Parties, establishing the dual-party structure that exists today. He was the first president who came from a rural, deep Southern background (he was born in the rustic woods of South Carolina) and his impoverished country upbringing informed his presidential policies. As someone who also captained the premier national political position, Jackson is responsible for bringing the experience and voice of the common man to the federal government. This essay will explore three of the most salient aspects of Jackson's presidency: the Nullification Crisis of 1832, the National Bank episode of 1833-34, and the treatment of American Indians and slaves.

The seventh president of the United States; Andrew Jackson, was not only notorious for his success as a general but also for his actions as president. The Removal Policy is still discussed today because of the question of whether or not the removal of Native Americans benefited them or not. The intent of Jackson's actions is controversial because it is not clear if he acted in the best interest of Native Americans or for white settlers. Robert Remini's writing Andrew Jackson and his Indian Wars he concludes that Jackson's removal act was the only way to protect the Native Americans from conflict with impeding settlers. Albert Cave writes in Abuse of Power: Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal act of 1830, that Jackson broke promises