HS #114 2025.1.9
The Next Four Years
I begin this month’s column by borrowing two paragraphs from what I wrote in February 2018 on the occasion of Presidents Day towards the beginning of President Trump’s first term:
What does it take to lead a country? Is it possible, for example, to have an effective leader who i) is unpolished, with no prior political experience, ii) seems focused on his own needs and situation, iii) gets into fights regularly, hitting back hard - and often unfairly - because it is an effective way to win, iv) can’t control his tongue – gets himself into trouble repeatedly because he can’t just keep quiet, v) has his career threatened momentarily by the way he treats women but still wins in the end, vi) is impulsive and erratic, apparently giving little deep or reflective thought to his actions, vii) is excessively concerned about keeping his hair, viii) marries a foreign wife, ix) lives this sort of a life even without drinking alcohol?
Unlikely leader to be sure, but Sampson was the leader of Israel for twenty years. And even though an unsavory character personally, he was able to accomplish some things and help Israel in certain ways not only in spite of, but because of his rather unique “skill set.” Indeed, his self-centered, vindictive temperament was crucial to his success. Had he not taken a hard line on his enemies and sought revenge, his extraordinary strength would have been of no use. Gladly, his type of leadership was not needed for long, so it eventually passed on to those with different temperaments and value systems. Shows the wisdom and value of limiting the terms of leaders.
Looking back, it would be easy to finish this column by listing actions and behaviors of Trump with which I disagree and/or find abhorrent. I mention only two: Should a president be reelected who i) watched a mob invade and damage the U.S. Capital yelling “Hang Mike Pence” for three hours before taking action, ii) spent the last four years claiming he won the 2020 election in spite of total overwhelming evidence to the contrary? Given my moral/value system, the answer is a clear “no.”
However, like Sampson, that does not mean that he has not and cannot not again be an effective president. So, in the interest of giving every reader something to ponder, I make the following points:
President Trump’s 2017 Inauguration Speech was one of the best I have ever heard. He called Americans to come together – actually using the word “love.” Only one other politician in my lifetime have I heard use that word: Bobby Kennedy – in his great speech in Indianapolis on the occasion of Martin Luther King’s assassination. As are all such speeches, Trump enumerated present faults with America which needed addressing. Yet the press lambasted the speech as dark and violent.
I wonder how Trump may have responded had the press (and Democratic leadership) reacted instead by saying, “What a pleasant surprise! – we’ll work with you!” The sociologist Charles Horton Cooley explained, “I am not what I think I am, I am not what you think I am, I am what I think you think I am.” Understand? We become the people we think others see us to be. When chair of Mathematics Departments, I made sure that new professors got positive reinforcement from their students, so that they would “live into” that identity. Same is true of Trump, and, unfortunately, the initial negative feedback he got helped define his first term.
So let’s look ahead. Do you agree that since we are a nation under the rule of law, those who join us should come lawfully? True?
Do you agree that our national debt is spiraling ever greater, and that this can kicked down the road will one day be a great burden affecting the quality of life of future generations? If so, isn’t the answer BOTH tax increases and spending cuts? If Trump successfully works on the second, the Democrats can then do the first.
Isn’t it true that tariffs will bring in income while also protecting American jobs and somewhat curbing American consumption. All sound good to me.
Trump hates killing. He compliments when he can and develops relationships with enemies. Sounds like something I once read in a Gospel (not assuming that Trump has). That’s not a bad place to start in foreign policy.
So, as with the new leadership in Syria, let’s give the guy a chance.