Fighting, Winning and Losing: Jackson, Trump and Ulysses S. Grant

Having a politician fight for you is good, and having one who can win is great.  But what does winning actually look like?  We compare Jackson, Grant and Donald Trump to explore the differences.  

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Fighting, Winning and Losing: Jackson, Trump and Ulysses S. Grant 

November 2022

“I cannot spare this man, he fights.”

Abraham Lincoln speaking of Ulysses Grant

“You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out.” Andrew Jackson, referring to the managers of the 2nd Bank of America 

“Every good citizen makes his country’s honor his own and cherishes it not only as precious but as sacred. He is willing to risk his life in its defense and is conscious that he gains protection while he gives it.” 

Andrew Jackson

“We’re all fighting battles, but I love fighting these battles.”

“Sometimes you have to toot your own horn because nobody else is going to do it.”

Former President Donald Trump

In historian HW Brands Biography of Andrew Jackson, entitled American Lion, the author outlines the moment, at the beginning of the second term in the early 1830s, when it looked like South Carolina might try and secede from the Union, “In his rooms of the second floor of the White House in the flickering light of candles and oil lamps, President Andrew Jackson was furious and full of fight. ‘By the God of Heaven I will uphold the laws.’ Week after week, he 

threatened to filed a formidable force, and he knew who should led them, When everything is ready, noted the gaunt, 6,’1”, 140, pound 65 year old, “I shall join them myself, Jackson said.”

Andrew Jackson lost his father before he was born, served in the Revolutionary War as a teenager, was elected representative to the new state of Tennessee at 29, won the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812 at age 48, crushed the Seminoles at the age of 50. By the time he became president, he had fought in two duels. 

After the election of 1824, his opponent of that year, John Quincy Adams, won the presidency through votes obtained in the House of Representatives. Though Jackson won the popular and most electoral votes, he did not have enough of the latter to win the presidency outright, so the matter was then moved to the House of Representatives. A key House member Henry Clay, who also contended for the presidency that year, was instrumental in pushing the House to vote for Adams. Later, Clay was named Secretary of State in the Adams Administration. This little deal was declared a corrupt bargain by the formidable Jackson. 

In the early Republic, the Secretary of State office was held by Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, and Adams. It was the 2nd president, Quincy Adam’s father, who was the only man to obtain with presidency without being secretary of state in the early Republic. Hence the umbrage felt by Jackson for what he saw as a questionable election, though there was nothing illegal that Adams and Clary had done.  

But Jackson, the constant fighter, spent the intervening years from 1824 spewing his invective from one part of the nation to another. He was already popular in 1824, but this effort swayed enough additional voters to win the presidency outright in 1828, making Adams only the second (his father was the other) one-term president of the first seven to hold the office.  

But Jackson was not just a populist lout. He knew how to identify talent, such as the invaluable Martin Van Buren, and which policies to pursue and battles to fight. He cowed the 2nd Bank of the United States and the entire State of South Carolina. His success was such that he was only one of a half dozen or so presidents to serve two terms and be succeeded by a member of his party. Though it was common in the early Republic, from Jackson until today, only Grant (barely), Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan have accomplished that feat. Jackson was a fighter, one of the most pugnacious ever to hold the White House. And this is not just about his wartime record. According to the National Constitution Center, “One of most famous duels involving Jackson was with Charles Dickinson. In 1806, the two men met after Dickinson insulted Jackson’s wife. Dickinson was regarded as one of the best shots in America. Jackson was a fearless soldier. The future president survived Dickinson’s first shot, but Jackson’s pistol jammed. In a breach of the code duello, Jackson re-cocked his pistol and killed Dickinson.

In 1802, Jackson was involved in a duel with Tennessee’s governor, John Sevier, that ended in a standoff involving their seconds. Another frequent dueler was Thomas Hart Benton, who fought in the army with Jackson and had two duels with a rival attorney, Charles Lucas. Benton killed Lucas in their second duel in 1817. As a senator, Benton became Jackson’s right-hand man in Congress.”

As noted, there was more to Jackson than just his militancy; in short, he was effective. By facing down South Carolina during the nullification crisis, he postponed a possible civil War for thirty years. These were precious years that enabled the North to industrialize and gain the economic and manpower strength necessary that was ultimately the key to winning the Civil War.  

In Robert Remini’s Andrew Jackson and the Bank War, the author states, “According to Jackson, the 2nd Bank of the United States sought to destroy our republican institution. Of course, Jackson was a wild romantic. He tended to represent all his enemies as devouring monsters threatening American people’s lives.” Yet as Remini notes that when speaking to his ally Martin Van Buren, Jackson stated, “The bank Mr. Van Buren, is trying to kill me, he said in a whisper; then pressing Van Buren’s hand very tightly, he added, but I will it. And that is precisely what Jackson did.  

Jackson was not just a fighter; he was the winner. He was elected representative, senator, and president twice and commanded such clout that he basically told the nation that his ardent supporter, Martin Van Buren, would succeed him. His only critical loss was that election of 1824, the first in which the eventual loser won the popular vote. And consider that he almost won despite his opponent having been Secretary of State in the previous administration and the son of one of the founders of the Republic. And this went beyond Van Buren. The concept of a Jacksonian Democratic party endured until the Civil War, nearly 30 years after his death. And the reverence the nation had for him saw him on the $20 bill and routinely ranked among the best presidents. Well, until recently, slaveholding and his atrocious treatment of native Americans began to be added to his evaluation. He fought but within the rules. Though he labeled the Adams-Clay deal a corrupt bargain, the effect was more political. He did not disown his VP or whip up his fiery supporters to attack Congress. He then came back triumphant. He fought, and he won.  

Here is another Trump quote, “You know, I was dealt a lot of bad hands.” Again, this was in reference to his administration and the situation he received upon his inauguration. But whether this statement was applied to his life or his presidency, that was not entirely true. The recovery under Obama was sluggish but not a full-blown recession. Interest rates were low. The situation in Iraq had been wound down, and Afghanistan was relatively stable. Moreover, he controlled both houses of Congress. 

He did inherit massive debt and large deficits, as had every president since Johnson, but Trump was not interested in those. The bad hands he did receive were twofold: Russian Collusion fakery and COVID. The Russian Collusion fantasy was initially concocted by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which would continue to dog Trump’s presidency throughout his term. But all of this, compared with the likes of Lincoln, McKinley, Harding, Franklin Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Johnson, or even George W. Bush, who had the terrorist attacks on America in the 8th month of his presidency, Trump’s challenges were manageable. But Trump, who claims to be a stable genius and to have the best of everything, did not have the worst of everything upon his inception. Contrast Jackson’s declaration of killing the 2nd Bank of America and then comparing it with Trump’s statements on North Korea, still lobbing missiles, health care reform, never passed, and the southern wall, never built.  

Much is made of Lincoln’s statement of Grant, “I cannot spare this man, he fights.” But a little context is in order. By the time of Lincoln’s statement and support, Grant had captured the twin forts of Henry and Donelson and did not lose the battle of Shiloh. This battle jeopardized Grant’s future as he was clearly unprepared on the first day. The first day of the Battle of Shiloh was an absolute debacle for Ulysses S. Grant’s Army of the Tennessee. On April 6, 1862, the five federal divisions at Pittsburgh Landing were caught with their pants around their ankles by attacking southern regiments. With their backs to the Tennessee River, Grant’s men barely held on, prevented from being driven into the Tennessee only by brutal, desperate fighting and nightfall.

Late that evening, William Tecumseh Sherman found General Grant chewing a cigar under a tree. “Well, Grant,” Sherman asked him, “we’ve had the devil’s own day, haven’t we?”

“Yes,” Grant replied. “Lick ’em tomorrow, though.”

The stoical Grant rallied his army and stymied the ambitions of the confederates. Not a win, but not really a loss either, and in losing the Confederate commander, Sydney Johnston, an irreplaceable general was lost. It was after this battle that Lincoln made his famous statement about Grant.

This battle was in direct contrast to what Lincoln was seeing in the East in the person of George McLellan. After goading McClellan to action for most of early 1862, Lincoln stated, “If General McClellan does not want to use the army, I would like to borrow it for a time.” Finally moved to act, and despite enjoying a near 2 to 1 advantage in the peninsula campaign in Virginia called the Seven Days Battle, McClellan consistently let himself be outmaneuvered and outfought, bullied really. Then at the battle of Antietam later in September, McClellan had the chance to end the war. After the Union Army beat back several confederate attacks, Lee limped back to Virginia, but McClellan kept two army corps of approximately 20,000 fresh troops on the sidelines.  

Lincoln’s support of Grant was justified by a resounding series of successes around Vicksburg, Mississippi, and later in Tennessee. First, Grant maneuvered and fought skillfully to win Vicksburg, the key city on the Mississippi, thus cutting the Confederacy in two. Then he broke the Confederate hold on Chattanooga, at which point Lincoln appointed Grant General in Chief. Finally, though Grant experienced several reversals around Richmond, Virginia, his doggedness and tenacity eventually wore the Confederacy down, leading to complete victory for the North and a permanent end to slavery.  

The single most significant defense I hear of Trump is that he fights. And after the likes of HW Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, I can certainly see this appeal. After Obama slipped the leash on the IRS to stop conservative non-profits from organizing, straw-manned Republicans with calumnies and discovered his pen and phone executive order administration, a fighter seemed to be on order. 

And during Trump’s presidency, he did indeed fight and win on a few occasions. Nowhere was this more evident than during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. Almost every other name, including George W Bush, a fighting president, would have abandoned, unjustly, but not Trump. In fact, when the heat kept getting turned up, so did Trump’s initial tepidness towards his nominee turn into a fervor. For me, this was Trump’s finest hour. And yet this stands out, almost starkly, from the reality TV show circus he enabled. The rolling through Chiefs of Staff, the firing of cabinet-level secretaries through social media, the sieve-like leaks, and the 3:00 tweeting. For all of Jackson’s bluster and Grant’s drinking issues, the one word that governed their successes was a relentless focus on their goals. Like so many half-baked celebrities Trump’s ultimate goal was not to reform the government nor to enact a conservative agenda but instead to be famous.  

A few years ago, there was an animated program meant as a spoof of reality TV called Total Drama Island. Here is the opening song:

Dear Mom and Dad, I’m doing fine

You guys are on my mind

You asked me what I wanted to be

And now I think the answer is plain to see

I wanna be famous

I wanna live close to the sun

Well, pack your bags ’cause I’ve already won

Everything to prove, nothing in my way

I’ll get there one day

Cause I wanna be famous

This is a silly throwaway theme from a silly throwaway cartoon aimed at teens, and yet, it says a lot about both reality TV programs and about Trump. 

We can pop-psychologize Trump all we like. Wealthy authoritarian father. Yet Indulged at every level of his life with the finest schools. Early success in Manhattan real estate that he confused with keen business acuity belied by his four bankruptcies. But the one thing consistent from his early business days in the early 1980s was that it was all about him and being famous, and Trump instinctively understood that drama gets attention. The two divorces in which he bragged about his affairs. The branding everything with his last name. The risk-taking leading to those bankruptcies. The constant cameos in movies and TV shows until he starred in his reality TV show. He was running for president on the Reform Party ticket in 2000. And the bizarre fights. 

In 2006 he began an odd feud with Rosie O’Donnell. That spat, a precursor of the Trump persona as President, began with O’Donnell calling him out over his divorces and bankruptcies. Trump wasn’t happy about that. He fired back in People magazine, calling O’Donnell “a real loser” and “a woman out of control.” He threatened to sue her and said he looked forward “to taking lots of money from my nice, fat little Rosie.” Jackson took on the bank of America and prevented a state by seceding with the force of his personality. Grant won battles and eventually outfought Robert E. Lee. Trump ridiculed the body of a C-list celebrity. There is fighting, and there is fighting.  

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, idea bankrupted American media writers and producers looked across the pond and noted that Britain seemed to be onto something. They were doing a sort of game shows by putting regular people into situations and seeing what they would do. Moore them on an island or test their worst fears by hanging them 20 stories up or dumping them into a crate of snakes. This brilliant genre was called reality TV. I always like that one of the first of these, and one of the most successful as still airs today some 22 years later, involved a man who simultaneously dates 30 women and gets to pick them. Unless your reality is that of an Ottoman Turkish Sultan, I never thought that felt all that real.  

But decades before that, we had a reality TV show star named Donald Trump. It has all the trappings. He lived his life on TV. He did things others did not do. He was rich (well, he appeared to be rich). So there was firm logic that at some point, he would host his own show, the Apprentice, where Trump, later champion of the working man, made his catchphrase by telling aspirants that they were fired. Trump continually bragged about the Apprentice being number 1 in the ratings. For him, this was winning.  

But here is the reality. 1 out of 4 that is a 25% winning percentage. He won the 2016 election with fewer votes than Hillary Clinton, and just 100,000 votes tipped the balance in three states for Trump. And this was Hillary Rodham Clinton, who had more baggage than Delta and American Airlines combined. Who was one of the poorest retail politicians of our time. After eight years in the Senate and four as Secretary of State, who could point to precisely zero significant policy accomplishments and policy was supposed to be her strong suit, her only suit. And on the eve of the election itself, FBI Director James Comey mentioned the corrupt use of an email server just 11 days before the election. This was the win.  

Here are the losses. Lost the House of Representatives in a blue wave election in 2018. Lost the presidency to an enfeebled Joe Biden and his cackling running mate Kamala Harris. Lost the Senate in 2021 because of his pique about how Georgia counted votes, essentially telling his followers to stay home and not vote. David Perdue, who had more votes on election day. He lost his run-off election and the Senate by 11,000 votes. And what did Biden do with that Senate? $1.6 trillion in COVID spending and $800 billion in infrastructure driving inflation. And a very liberal Supreme Court Justice in Kentaji Brown Jackson. 

And now, because of his insistence on putting his picks into crucial Senate races, we have again lost the Senate and will have a tiny minority in the House. This is a year in which inflation, crime, border issues, Afghanistan, and the doddering Biden should have been on the ballot. Instead, Trump, as he always does, as he always needs, made the election about him by putting a stop to the steal first timers in winnable races. His record is now 1-4. If he is nominated or runs as an independent, the record will be 1-5. 

In his biography of Andrew Jackson, historian Sean Wilentz notes of the 7th president, “By pushing the idea of democracy as far as he did, and equating the Union’s survival with the survival of free government, Jackson expanded the terms upon which Americans conducted their national experiment in popular sovereignty.” Of course, all politicians have enormous egos. It is part of the concept of running for office or seeking power. But Note this fighter had a purpose than himself. And In the end, Jackson won. Grant won. Trump loses and will keep doing so, but it is not really in his hands, It is in ours, and we must now undertake to do everything, legally, within our power to make sure that the losing stops.  

One might conclude from this piece that I am a never Trumper in popular parlance. That is not entirely true. I am anti-progressive in the extreme. I am anti-left. And I am most assuredly anti-losing. A 1-4 record would get any coach fired or a player traded. 

This is that situation. But rabidly anti-Trump? For me, his finest moment was the Kavanaugh hearings. Looking back to those 15 candidates running for president, none of them would have stood by the unjust, unfair, and never proven allegations against him. The calumnies and excrement thrown at a decent man were far more about the beliefs and moral rot at the heart of his accusers than about Kavanaugh himself. Yet there we were, watching another person go down. But not for Trump.  

I do not need a narcissist. I need someone firm in conviction of their conservatism who aligns my interests with theirs, not their needs in spite of mine. But I do need to know that, like Kavanaugh, my political leaders have my back, that they are not going to abandon their principles, or me, the one who gave them my precious vote, because of another faction’s shrill and abusive cries. And Trump is not there to defend me or my values. Joe Biden is in office. Nancy Pelosi held the Speaker’s gavel for four very long years. Chuck Schumer is still the Senate leader. 

And if we go with Trump in 2024, we will not win. I have no issue with fighting, but I do hate losing. But what does winning look like? I suppose I could win better in business or life if I bent the rules or issues lies and calumnies. But what have I succeeded? Winning, to me, in the political game means restoring Americans’ faith in our nation, our institutions, and ourselves. It means relying more on ourselves than on the government. It implies a belief in democracy and capitalism. It means a controlled way to manage immigrants and the lowest taxes, deficits, and debt obtainable. Jackon’s concept of winning was greater democracy, more power in the hands of the people. Lincoln’s original winning concept was to preserve the union and later to end slavery, Grant being the instrument to bring both outcomes about. So what is winning to Donald Trump? Keeping himself famous, the center of all attention, and if he wins, we lose.