For years, I’ve felt that Donald Trump’s leadership style — marked by bluster, self‑absorption, and an inability to imagine life from anyone else’s vantage point — was steering the country toward a breaking point. What finally caught up with him wasn’t just political opposition; it was the nation’s exhaustion.
His presence saturated every corner of American life, every news cycle, every conversation, until people simply had enough. The recent election results were, in my view, a referendum on that fatigue. They were about him — unmistakably — and the public’s decision felt like a long‑overdue correction. It reconciled me with a majority of my fellow citizens who, at last, seemed to recognize the unsustainability of his approach.My own distrust of Trump began early, back in the 2015 primaries, when he chose insult over argument and spectacle over substance. I never believed in his claims of business genius, nor in the aura of infallibility he projected. His confidence often felt less like strength and more like a refusal to confront reality.
The end of his first term offered a clear warning about the consequences of such leadership, and that warning only grew louder over time. Now, those in Congress and government members or big donors who aligned themselves with him face the difficult task of distancing themselves from the legacy they helped enable.
Political stains are not easily washed away, especially when they come from years of enabling a leader whose style rewarded loyalty over judgment. I’ve always had a simple test for leadership: Would I trust this person to run my business? Even in 2015, the answer for Trump was an unequivocal no.
Leadership requires persuasion, steadiness, and the ability to bring people along — qualities captured in the old saying that one catches more flies with honey than with vinegar. That wisdom feels more relevant than ever.

No comments:
Post a Comment