Political “greatness” is a hard thing to determine, although some people have tried.
One of the accepted theories is that it is necessary for a president to face significant challenges, meet them by altering how the US operates, institutionalize those changes in a way that has a lasting impact, and persuade the American people to support them by unifying ( or at least coalescing ) behind the president’s leadership.
Research on the role of US president has attempted to establish how past presidents ‘ positions stack up against those of their predecessors. There is general agreement that the United States has had three truly great presidents – George Washington ( 1789-1797 ), Abraham Lincoln ( 1861-1865 ), and Franklin Delano Roosevelt ( 1933-1945 ) – and several truly terrible presidents – including Warren G Harding ( 1921-1923 ), James Buchanan ( 1857-1861 ) and Franklin Pierce ( 1853-1857 ).
But what distinguishes these presidents as great or bad? These examinations are consistent with the intensity of the problems that these leaders encountered during their terms in office and how they successfully overcame them.
George Washington had to work together to form a new country out of the 13 freshly united states, creating a nation that still stands.
Lincoln had to deal with the independence of the southern says, the Civil War, and the difficulty of putting an end to slavery. He won the war, bringing the country together, and finally put an end to the most controversial matter the country has ever encountered ( or at least its change from slavery to racism and segregation ).
FDR participated in both the Second World War and the Great Depression. He also altered the US government, giving birth to the modern-liberal condition.
All three faced philosophical problems to the government’s very existence, and they succeeded in overcoming them. By the end of their administration, all three had finally been acknowledged as having influenced the public to their opinions.
As for the “terrible” leaders, they usually preceded the fantastic people, facing similar problems and failing to meet them. Many of the “middle” leaders never had to face significant difficulties or were able to overcome them by utilizing the country’s existing power and institutions without having to transform the nation.
So where does Trump fall in this mythology? His previous name, generally speaking, is difficult to define as “great”. In fact, according to some political positions, he is considered the worst president in history.
He did implement some scheme adjustments that his supporters liked, but he was able to bring about lasting change or unite the nation in support of his leadership. Reelection battle and his son Joe Biden’s instant reform of many of his policies provide evidence of this, which demonstrates that Trump had not been able to engender lasting change.
The Covid-19 pandemic and the country’s huge polarization provided the opportunity, but neither of these events led to unifying victories for Trump’s legacy.
Trump largely responded to the epidemic with” Operation Warp Speed,” a public-private collaboration that accelerated the development of vaccinations for the pandemic. However, he downplayed vaccines as a cure for the disease in his later speeches and tweets, stoking disagreement over how to address the issue, causing magnetization and stoking vaccine skepticism.
The US’s largest issue that has occurred over the past 20 years has undoubtedly been its increasing degree of magnetization, which has increased steadily since the mid-1990s. President Obama, Biden, and George W. Bush have all failed to stop the country’s growth, making it the most significant domestic threat to legal democracy.
Trump may be able to stop this, despite being generally seen as a divided and polarizing number.
One of Trump’s greatest advantages is that he has assembled a group of incredibly devoted and devoted followers who can rely on his selections. His supporters appear to be enthusiastic about Trump and his individual tone, which have given him great latitude to pursue his goals with legislation in a variety of fields. His supporters care a lot about issues like immigration and the business, and he has already taken steps to satisfy them in these areas.
His day-one actions , to mark the border , and boost arrests will , meet some Republicans,  , and research indicates that views of the economy are  , greatly biased by politics. Trump’s mere election will likely encourage Republicans ‘ conviction that the business is performing well.
Trump’s biggest challenge is in getting the almost two-thirds of Americans who don’t consistently vote Republican on table. Because of his supporters ‘ devotion, he is likely to keep them backing whatever cause he advocates for in the majority of policy sections. He frequently makes changes in what he stands for and supports policies that his supporters used to support without experiencing reaction.
He has changed, for instance, from opposing the US government’s restrictions on the social media network Twitter to delaying the US’s. With a little maneuvering in the social environment, he might be able to win more supporters among Americans.
You Trump expand his assistance?
If Trump were to take action on issues that already have widespread public support, such as abortion, gun control, and the provincial part in healthcare, he would likely be able to maintain his devoted following while gaining support from earlier hostile groups.
The majority of people prefer Democratic policies on these subjects, so Trump may offer to work with Democrats to create nonpartisan policy that previous presidents had just dreams about.
Republican supporters may not be able to cast ballots against their own president, who frequently might laugh at working with Democrats to succeed. Democrats are but defeated that they might seize every chance they are given to enhance their goals, which is against the customary tendency to attempt to deny a sitting Republican president any parliamentary success.
In this way, Trump may achieve something that no previous leader has accomplished in the last 30 times: bipartisan support for significant congressional legislation that would tackle issues that Americans consider crucial. This may end the polarization circular and provide the first political pact in US history in decades.
It is difficult to understand how Trump achieves his purpose of being viewed as “great” if this situation is left open and a new global turmoil may arise. The course of four years will show.
David Andersen is an associate professor in US politicians, Durham University
The Conversation has republished this essay under a Creative Commons license. Read the original post.