Opinion of Martin Van Buren

[Frodo]

There are many miles of distance between the "not really a fan, as such, though it may look like it to outside observers" attitude of Fillmore or Buchanan, and Van Buren's who was, it is safe to say, the most opposed President pre-Lincoln.

That may have been true after his presidency, but during his administration:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I guess the main difference between Martin Van Buren and Fillmore, Pierce, and Buchanan is that he was opposed to the expansion of slavery into the western territories.  He did vote against the admission of Missouri into the Union as a slave state when he was in Congress, after all.  

His is essentially the same position of Abraham Lincoln up until he abolished slavery in the District of Columbia in early 1862, and issued the Emancipation Proclamation later that same year.  

[minionofmidas]

There are many miles of distance between the "not really a fan, as such, though it may look like it to outside observers" attitude of Fillmore or Buchanan, and Van Buren's who was, it is safe to say, the most opposed President pre-Lincoln.

John Quincy Adams?

And Taylor, while a slaveholder, was quite opposed to its expansion outside the West, something that Pierce and Buchanan were willing to entice.

Adams. Good point. Though he evolved on the issue as well as "evolved", I think.
I'm well aware of Taylor, of course. Not being a political man, he had the right instincts - that further expansion of slavery beyond Texas was a nonstarter for a number of reasons (geographic, demographic - look at the northwest's growth in the era), international, and that the only way to end the debate was to create Free States in the South West now.
And he didn't share the just-as-pervasive-if-less-dangerous anti-Mexican racism of the age. That's another huge part of why his scheme to admit what would have been a huge Mestizo State of New Mexico was unthinkable to Congress.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

There are many miles of distance between the "not really a fan, as such, though it may look like it to outside observers" attitude of Fillmore or Buchanan, and Van Buren's who was, it is safe to say, the most opposed President pre-Lincoln.

John Quincy Adams?

And Taylor, while a slaveholder, was quite opposed to its expansion outside the West, something that Pierce and Buchanan were willing to entice.

Adams. Good point. Though he evolved on the issue as well as "evolved", I think.
I'm well aware of Taylor, of course. Not being a political man, he had the right instincts - that further expansion of slavery beyond Texas was a nonstarter for a number of reasons (geographic, demographic - look at the northwest's growth in the era), international, and that the only way to end the debate was to create Free States in the South West now.
And he didn't share the just-as-pervasive-if-less-dangerous anti-Mexican racism of the age. That's another huge part of why his scheme to admit what would have been a huge Mestizo State of New Mexico was unthinkable to Congress.

I mis-typed. Meant "outside the South".