Only argument that can be made is a big maybe, because we probably wouldn’t be here without him, is Washington. But... that’s just a theory, a US history theory.
Perhaps consider different military history lenses? For instance, General Custer, whose refusal to pause and regroup lead to the Massacre at Little Big Horn. General MacArthur, who made the hard call to cede the Philippines to brutal Japanese forces in order to regroup in Australia. Result? Returned to Philippines. Crushed Japanese. Swept on to Japan. Japan surrendered. WW11 over. We won.
Custer, impulsive/reactive approach, ego driven and fame focused, relished going out in a blaze of glory. MacArthur, patient long game approach, ego discipline, win focused.
Perhaps some supporters, still in pain over the brutality of The Steal, are pissed Trump wasn't a dashing General Custer, editing out of their 'movie' the final horrific, pointless slaughter of Custer and his loyal troops? Perhaps when they see MacArthur Trump, they're in the 'leaving the Philippines' part of the move which was a gut wrenching, horror filled dark time? Perhaps they can't yet imagine how the MacArthur movie turns out? A joy filled return and a triumphant victory made possible by the Generals ego sacrificing, brutally pragmatic decision to "lose", temporarily, in order to ultimately win?
How can "resisting" be accurately assessed? In the now or with the perspective of time? In the middle of the 'movie' or when the 'movie' ends and the credits start to roll? Did MacArthur really fail to resist by leaving the Phllipines?
Bottom line, what happens in real life doesn't just depend on a prescient General but on how his people respond to a gut wrenching loss. Remember the Alamo? Trump does. He hopes you do too. In fact he visited the Alamo just before leaving DC to jog your memory and give you inspiration.
His legacy is still being created. Historical scholars believe even ten years after events is faaaaar too early to do any insightful assessment. Reflections on my own life certainly underscores how important the distance of time is in order to see events clearly.
his legacy was a booming economy, creating a fair international trade partnerships, making us the top oil producing country, making things better for blacks, women and homos- the list is endless
Best leader of all time, no close second
Exactly. There is no close second. Best ever. By a lot.
Only argument that can be made is a big maybe, because we probably wouldn’t be here without him, is Washington. But... that’s just a theory, a US history theory.
I love Trump, bit he doesn't rise to the level of Washington. Trump would have needed to resist the Democrats' crossing of the Rubicon for that.
Perhaps consider different military history lenses? For instance, General Custer, whose refusal to pause and regroup lead to the Massacre at Little Big Horn. General MacArthur, who made the hard call to cede the Philippines to brutal Japanese forces in order to regroup in Australia. Result? Returned to Philippines. Crushed Japanese. Swept on to Japan. Japan surrendered. WW11 over. We won.
Custer, impulsive/reactive approach, ego driven and fame focused, relished going out in a blaze of glory. MacArthur, patient long game approach, ego discipline, win focused.
Perhaps some supporters, still in pain over the brutality of The Steal, are pissed Trump wasn't a dashing General Custer, editing out of their 'movie' the final horrific, pointless slaughter of Custer and his loyal troops? Perhaps when they see MacArthur Trump, they're in the 'leaving the Philippines' part of the move which was a gut wrenching, horror filled dark time? Perhaps they can't yet imagine how the MacArthur movie turns out? A joy filled return and a triumphant victory made possible by the Generals ego sacrificing, brutally pragmatic decision to "lose", temporarily, in order to ultimately win?
How can "resisting" be accurately assessed? In the now or with the perspective of time? In the middle of the 'movie' or when the 'movie' ends and the credits start to roll? Did MacArthur really fail to resist by leaving the Phllipines?
Bottom line, what happens in real life doesn't just depend on a prescient General but on how his people respond to a gut wrenching loss. Remember the Alamo? Trump does. He hopes you do too. In fact he visited the Alamo just before leaving DC to jog your memory and give you inspiration.
Maybe Jefferson too, other than that, no one has come close to matching this man.
I'd say Ben Franklin was closest to the Trump of his day, he just never saw things get to the point where he had to run
he definitely would have been if his legacy had not been stolen from him
His legacy is still being created. Historical scholars believe even ten years after events is faaaaar too early to do any insightful assessment. Reflections on my own life certainly underscores how important the distance of time is in order to see events clearly.
his legacy was a booming economy, creating a fair international trade partnerships, making us the top oil producing country, making things better for blacks, women and homos- the list is endless
and Biden has wiped all of that away