Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Harry Truman's Second Term (comparing Truman to Bush)
Suite 101.com ^ | Isaac M. McPhee

Posted on 11/05/2008 10:56:07 AM PST by meandog

After his breathtaking victory against Thomas Dewey in the 1948 election, President Truman dove headfirst into his second term.

Unfortunately, he would find this term quite different from the first, which was filled, for the most part, with great successes but increasing unpopularity among the American people.

The Rise of Communism The vast majority of Truman's second term would consist of the very beginning of that pseudo-conflict which would remain present in America's consciousness for nearly four more decades - the Cold War.

It didn't take long after the end of World War II for America to realize that the Communists of the Soviet Union - formerly allies - had become a great threat. This realization led to the "red scare" in America, leading to McCarthyism and other reactionary measures, all of which only act to take away from the fact that the threat itself was certainly very real.

Just over a year after being inaugurated for his second term, Truman found himself facing perhaps the most important event of his entire Presidency - the invasion of South Korea by the Communists to the North.

The Korean War When the North Koreans invaded on June 25, 1950, Truman responded quickly, not waiting for congressional approval (which hurt his approval rating, but this was only the beginning). He ordered a naval blockade of North Korea and asked the U.N. to intervene militarily, which it did (for the first time in history).

American forces, not entirely ready for such a conflict (Truman had issued a roll-back of the armed forces after World War II), were hastily sent at first simply to defend South Korea. When this was realized, Truman fired Defense Secretary Louis Johnson and replaced him with General George Marshall. Under Marshall's leadership, the strategy in Korea changed into one in which North Korea itself would be invaded.

In September of 1950, under the leadership of General Douglas MacArthur, the U.N. forces performed a brilliant amphibious landing in North Korea, beginning the Battle of Inchon. The war appeared to be successful.

Unfortunately, the course of the war changed drastically when, in November, Chinese forces invaded North Korea and repelled the U.N. forces back across the 38th parallel (the modern North/South Korean border).

When General MacArthur spoke out in favor of a U.S. attack on China against direct orders from the administration, Truman had no choice but to fire the popular General, in a move which was almost universally panned at home. Because of this action - which the American people may not have fully understood - Truman's poll numbers plummeted, and even more so as victory in the war seemed to grow even further out of reach.

The Steel Strike To make matters even worse for Truman's poll numbers, a general steel industry strike in April of 1952 threatened to hurt the American economy. Like he did before with the railroads, Truman threatened to take control of the steel mills if the strike wasn't resolved.

Unlike the railroad situation, however, this time Truman was moved to actually take such actions. He declared government control over a number of steel mills, as the strike was hurting production of the much-needed munitions for the ongoing war in Asia.

Despite the public disapproval Truman faced over this action, he also found this action being defeated by the Supreme Court, who declared such an action unconstitutional.

Embattled Final Days By the final year of Truman's Presidency, he found himself facing poll numbers from the American people lower than any President in history (a record which still stands as of mid-2008), his approval rating dropping as low as 22% (several points lower, even, than President Nixon on the verge of his resignation).

Although he technically could have run for reelection under the law (the 22nd amendment, limiting a President to two terms had been ratified in 1951, and did not apply to the sitting President), he declined, for obvious reasons, instead backing Illinois Governor Adlai Stevenson, who went on to lose the election to General Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Leaving the White House, Truman's poll numbers had increased slightly, though many still considered him a failed President. As the years have passed by, however, his ranking has grown steadily, as historians have been able to look at his record more and more objectively, viewing his great many successes and weighing them against those decisions which were seen as failures.

Today, it is very rare that Truman is not ranked in the top ten Presidents of all time. Justice, in this regard, is perhaps being served. Proof that a President's approval rating is not always an accurate representation of success or failure.

:


TOPICS: Government; Miscellaneous; Unclassified; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bush; truman
After his breathtaking victory against Thomas Dewey in the 1948 election, President Truman dove headfirst into his second term.
After his victory against John Kerry in the 2004 election, President Bush relaxed at Crawford for nearly a month.

Unfortunately, he would find this term quite different from the first, which was filled, for the most part, with great successes butincreasing unpopularity among the American people.
Similar results. Bush had successes with two Supreme Court judges and the surge.

Just over a year after being inaugurated for his second term, Truman found himself facing perhaps the most important event of his entire Presidency - the invasion of South Korea by the Communists to the North.
Bush found himself facing a faltering effort in Iraq and waning support from the American people.

American forces, not entirely ready for such a conflict (Truman had issued a roll-back of the armed forces after World War II), were hastily sent at first simply to defend South Korea. When this was realized, Truman fired Defense Secretary Louis Johnson and replaced him with General George Marshall. Under Marshall's leadership, the strategy in Korea changed into one in which North Korea itself would be invaded.
Bush stubbornly hung on to his Secretary of Defense despite the setbacks until the 2006 "thumpin" occurred. Then he fired Donald Rumsfeld and replaced him with Dr. Robert Gates. Under Gate's leadership the strategy as forwarded by Gen. David Petraeus changed into one in which Iraqi insurgency quieted.

Despite the public disapproval Truman faced over this threatening to take over the steel industry to prevent wildcat strikes, Truman's fortitude stayed the course.
Bush did nothing during the runup of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lending crisis. He rushed in for a bailout with the crisis hit the banking industry.

Embattled Final Days By the final year of Truman's Presidency, he found himself facing poll numbers from the American people lower than any President in history (a record which still stands as of mid-2008), his approval rating dropping as low as 22% (several points lower, even, than President Nixon on the verge of his resignation).
Same here with Bush!

Leaving the White House, Truman's poll numbers had increased slightly, though many still considered him a failed President. As the years have passed by, however, his ranking has grown steadily, as historians have been able to look at his record more and more objectively, viewing his great many successes and weighing them against those decisions which were seen as failures.
To be determined?

1 posted on 11/05/2008 10:56:08 AM PST by meandog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: meandog

Truman was ultimately a liberal Democrat. He was hated for his foreign policy. Ultimately those who write history (ie liberals) began to paint him in a more positive light.

Bush is, and will forever remain, the evil conservative Republican to these “historians.”


2 posted on 11/05/2008 11:02:29 AM PST by Harry Wurzbach (Joe The Plumber & Rep. Thaddeus McCotter are my heroes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog

Does anybody else wonder why we still support the UN?

It tries to undermine the Constitution of the USA and
would love to cripple our Constitutional Republic.
In over 60 years No major politician has ever tried to
get the USA out of the UN.

16 out of 17 of the AMERICANS that were involved in
creating the UN were later identified, in sworn
testimony, as secret communist agents.

The first Secretary General was the AMERICAN Alger
Hiss.
Alger Hiss served time in prison pursuant to his
involvement in a Communist spy ring.

Many of the other AMERICANS that were involved in
creating the U . N. fled the country, to avoid
prosecution.

The ONE AMERICAN, that was involved in creating the UN
and was NOT later identified, in sworn testimony, as a
secret communist agent, was Dean Acheson.
Dean Acheson’s law firm was the legal representative of
the Soviet Union, in US courts.

If the AMERICANS that were involved in creating the UN
were Communists, what do you think we got from the rest
of the world?


3 posted on 11/05/2008 11:03:04 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (Obama, Change America will die for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog

“Leaving the White House, Truman’s poll numbers had increased slightly, though many still considered him a failed President. As the years have passed by, however, his ranking has grown steadily, as historians have been able to look at his record more and more objectively, viewing his great many successes and weighing them against those decisions which were seen as failures.”

i think bushs approval ratings are going to go up among liberals considering he is the reason they control huge majorities in the house and senate with the most liberal president ever. how can you not applaud after he gives you that gift?

i think bushs ratings are going to plummet through the floor among conservatives considering he pissed away everything we worked so hard to build.


4 posted on 11/05/2008 11:04:24 AM PST by philsfan24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philsfan24

Bush has probably impressed Libs with the the way he went all smoochy on 0bama’s win.


5 posted on 11/05/2008 11:09:00 AM PST by Chet 99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: meandog

Bush’s legacy is Iraq. If it is a thriving pro-western nation with a regular tourist trade 5 to 10 years from now, that’s his legacy, just like Truman with S. Korea... if it falls into chaos under a premature 0bama ordered withdrawal, he gets the LBJ Vietnam legacy.


6 posted on 11/05/2008 11:10:36 AM PST by Chet 99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

An interesting comparison to Bush and Iraq. Though it is flipped around and Obama isn’t really comparative to IKE.

It is obvious though that the country goes through almost natural seeming patterns after FDR.

I am beginning to think it is a net benefit to be the party in control of congress than the White House. The libs changed the landscape far more by having the Congress (on average) for the last 80 years or so than the Presidency. That is debatable though.


7 posted on 11/05/2008 11:19:57 AM PST by Crimson Elephant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: meandog
Bush's second term was a disaster. From Harriet Miers to Dubai Ports to Amnesty for Illegals to losing the congress and senate, to his failure to push for financial reform in spite of warning of grave consequences, to his support of that horrid bailout to his refusal to curb spending to his stubbornly allowing our troops in Iraq to suffer through the insurgency before being forced to change the policy there, and on and on.

He did some good things in his first term though his spending was out of control. Had he served only his first term he'd be respected right now. He ruined his reputation with the second. History may change that verdict but for now the jury is in.

8 posted on 11/05/2008 11:55:45 AM PST by pepsi_junkie (Often wrong, but never in doubt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog

Truman’s First Term

Dropped atomic bombs on Japan ending WWII
Saved Iran and Greece from Soviet takeovers
Airlifted supplies into Berlin saving the city from the Soviets.
Rebuilt Western Europe as a bulwark against communism with the Marshall Plan.
Won reelection

Truman’s Second Term

Abandoned China to Mao Tse-Tung
Invited the invasion of S Korea by excluding it from America’s sphere of protection
Attempted to socializ... uh take over and run the steel industry
Fired MacArthur for trying to win in Korea
Settled for stalemate in Korea during which more American soldiers died for nothing than in the two commie invasions
Left office least popular president in history


9 posted on 11/05/2008 12:01:22 PM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99
Bush’s legacy is Iraq. If it is a thriving pro-western nation with a regular tourist trade 5 to 10 years from now, that’s his legacy, just like Truman with S. Korea... if it falls into chaos under a premature 0bama ordered withdrawal, he gets the LBJ Vietnam legacy.

Well, believe or not, I concur with your assumption of his legacy. My fear, however, is that Iraq will not flourish under Obama. It is like an infant which survived a late-term botched abortion; it is still breathing with a beating heart but it needs care and norishment to thrive. And, well, we all know how Obama feels about aborted but living infants.

10 posted on 11/05/2008 12:07:54 PM PST by meandog (Hey Rush: Get it through your head, George W. Bush deserves the blame! Palin/Balwin 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: meandog

At this point, maybe I’m trying to see the pony in the horseshit, but I wonder if our position in Iraq will actually be improved with 0bama. If McCain squeaked in, the bitter moonbats in Congress would have done everything they could to kneecap our Iraq policy.

Perhaps after being briefed on what’s really going on over there, 0 will see its importance to our overall national security and push this along to completion.


11 posted on 11/05/2008 12:13:18 PM PST by Chet 99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99

Well, I believe Barry will stick to his promises about Iraq and immediately order a withdrawal. It will come at the expense of many American deaths, in a repeat of Bill Clinton’s Somalia exercise and probably mean the Iraqi nation will face a long period of anarchy with warlords ruling the various providences. Bush will of course be blamed and will richly deserve it!


12 posted on 11/05/2008 12:40:44 PM PST by meandog (Wasilla warrior in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson