This is another human failing that is NOT uncommon, to trust your friends above others is only human. Where Davis failed is that he continued to trust his friends even when they failed. Not an unadmirable condition if it was foolish. Lincoln on the other hand had no such attachments to his commander.
"Lincoln tried to micromanage too. When he finally let go of the reins and gave em to Grant,"
Lincoln did not cease to micromanage the war after he found Grant. We are aware of the political patrionage that got Grant his position superceeding even Hallacks authority. But that aside, Grant fought the "Terrible Math" war that Lincoln wanted fought.
In other word it didn't matter how many casualities it took, the object was simply to destroy Lee's Army any way Grant could. Taking massive casualities like Grant did in May of 1864 when he suffered 64,000 killed, wounded and missing, was something that any good Army Commander, even today, does not want to do. The good ones always want to accomplish the objective with as few casualities as possible.
I will remind everyone that Grant was called "Butcher" by his own army, because of his dogged tactic in which he was not smart enough to withdraw or for making ill advised assualts such as Cold Harbor. BUT, that was Lincoln's overall directive, which he so stated after the Burnside failure at Fredericksburg in Dec. 1862, Why he pressed Hooker after Chancellorsville, and Meade after Gettysburg to press Lee, that caused Grant to operate in this manner.
So yes Lincoln was very much managing the War with Grant in commsnd. Grant was fighting Lincoln's style of war until Lee got into the trenches at Petersburg.