I think this is why the last two movies he produced were much inferior. He used them to grind his political axe. If he would have stuck to character development and personal relationships, his legacy would have been one of best producers in history. Now we have to hold our nose a bit when we say that.
Well he has to show how a semi-democratic aristocratic republic can become a tyranny, it's not a "political axe" that I can see. As much a combination of Hitlers rise as Lincoln's abuse of power or anything else. I don't think any connection with Lincoln is really intentional, or with any other of so called good dictators per se. It's just how it always happens, democracies become dictatorships by a combination of demagoguery, warmongering, and/or enfranchisement. There are limites to what he can represent, he can't make the government more democratic by giving power to the capite censi for example, that would look too much like a knock on democracy itself.
Stuck to? As opposed to introduced? Perhaps I missed something in the first 4 movies.
Shalom.