I don’t think so. I’ve read two biographies, and there is very little admirable about him.
He was highly competent, but at least equally amoral. Ran as T. Jefferson’s running mate, and then tried to stab him in back in the Electoral College. Perfectly constitutional, but dishonorable. The only reason he failed is that Hamilton, who was Jefferson’s bitterest enemy, lobbied with Federalist electors not to give into Burr’s blandishments.
Nobody would look askance at him today, but he was shocking at the time.
He was the Bill Clinton of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, a man of infinitely flexible principles.
I didn’t say he was a good man, just a bad man with a spine. Could you really see Charlie Crist challenging someone to a duel with pistols, even one where the men were expected to miss on purpose?
AT the time, electors voted for two people without specifying for whom they were voting for President and for whom they were voting for Vice President.
The clear intent of the Federalist electors was to elect Jefferson President and Burr VP, but all of them voted for both, so they tied in the Electoral College. Under the Constitution, that meant that the election went to the House of Representatives, which was controlled by the Federalists.
Jefferson and Hamilton were bitter political enemies, but they had served together in Washington’s Cabinet. Hamilton told the Federalists, that while he disagreed with Jefferson, Jefferson was an honorable man, “which is more than I can say for Mr. Burr.” The Federalists went out and voted (reluctantly) for Jefferson, or cast blank ballots, allowing Jefferson to be elected. Burr never forgave Hamilton.
Remember, Hamilton and Burr were both New Yorkers and knew each other well. Hamilton read Burr’s character well.
Burr should have been prosecuted for killing Hamilton, but wasn’t.