It's reported that Lincoln's views "evolved" over time, and his calling for black enfranchisement in 1865 led John Wilkes Booth to assassinate him.
So what about 1855? Where was Lincoln then?
I'd say maybe half-way between Jefferson Davis-John Wilkes Booth and the Lincoln of April 14, 1865.
Compared to today's standards?
Well, whose standards, those of entirely reasonable people such as ourselves, or insane racists like, oh, I don't know, Maxine Watters ("impeach 45"), BLM ("pigs in a blanket..."), Rev. Wrong ("US of KKK"), Louis Farrahkan ("Hitler was a great man") & on & on.
By those standards, Lincoln would be in the deep negative numbers, surely.
You disagree?
“It’s reported that Lincoln’s views “evolved” over time, and his calling for black enfranchisement in 1865 led John Wilkes Booth to assassinate him.”
Lincoln was just starting to turn his life around.
This fourth question in your post related to the previous three questions and your own musings.
If I had the inclination to expand the one-to-ten scale to one-to-one hundred - which I don't; and if I had the inclination to expand the scale to include negative numbers - which I don't; and if I had the inclination to chase the Hitler rabbit you released - which I don't . . . I still don't know how I could simply express agreement or disagreement without getting as bollixed up in the distractions as you.
Maybe I should just state my opinion: sure Lincoln was a white supremacist. Most whites, north and south, were. That's one reason the race card, or even the slavery card, cannot be honestly played today by any region. They certainly cannot be used to justify the killing of 600,000 people.
There were real reasons the war was fought so vigorously by the North, and by the South. It is still not to late to acknowledge the reasons and to learn from the catastrophe.