When this man ran for the Presidency of the United States, I read his background and accomplishments in detail and concluded that through him we had the greatest potential in history for progress for the United States.  He was and is capable of organizing resources to solve problems and to create progress in all major areas - at an unprecedented pace!  (I did not agree with some of his party's policies, but I saw clearly that he would "do the will of the people", though he would first attempt to persuade them as to what he believed was right.  He would not be a victim or a blamer, but a doer.  He would never impose his values on others.)

Unfortunately, he made the mistake of following some pretty bad advice, in my opinion, in his campaign.  But that is all in the past. 

He was a man who did not really want the Presidency for himself, but he saw no other highly qualified man who would run for it, so he felt it was his duty to step in and run.  And he was a duck out of water in the poltical world.

Now it would be appropriate for him to seek to be, in a sense, the CEO For World Progress, not in terms of authority but in terms of function:  to organize the resources to bring about the desired improvements in the functioning of the world.  This would be where he would seek the high powered indiduals who could create the desired results in the areas of current need for the world (and the U.S., of course).  

As part of this, he would have to have some advisors in areas where he is not strong or insightful.  And, with his campaign advisors being the exception, I believe he has shown in his business and public life that he can select and recruit such advisors (and implementers!).  And he would have to set up a successor plan, so this organization would continue onward into historical accomplishments well into the future.


Early on it seemed easy to see that he was not addressing the deceptive characterizations about him, as if somehow people would figure that out.  But they didn't.  And many people on the middle and the right did not show up to vote. 

Instead, he stuck to the one theme, in an old fashioned campaigning mode where it is assumed that you just hit the other side's weakness and you'll win.  But any marketing person knows that you need to convey the advantages of your product, not just attempt to create a contrast that should be obvious.  The contrast was not obvious to any but a few people who actually studied him. 

His high competence was seen by few people.  The benefits he could give to the U.S. was not at all made clear - as those were very, very sizable. 

The advisors failed in Marketing 101.  And it was disappointing that he didn't step back and see that or at least seek advice from someone with greater perspective.

Now, the question is whether he will step up and contribute his great expertise and management skills to create a vastly better world.  He could, very possibly, create even more good there than he could have created as President (especially given the political obstacles).