Today, the Democratic Party candidates for President of the United States are competing to be perceived as the most “Progressive” of the pack. The label has caught on with the public although few individuals are able to define what it means. When they make the attempt, definitions often run the gamut of political perspectives, from centrist to socialist. For purposes of this blogpost, I will rely on a definition from The Pocket Oxford American Dictionary and Thesaurus (Third Edition). It describes a “Progressive” as someone “favoring new ideas or social reform.” Clearly a broad definition, one fitting many ideas and policies, some strictly dependent upon context.

By way of the above term, no one is better suited to be a “Progressive” model than Harry Truman. He was an elected local politician in Missouri, and eventually became its U.S. Senator. Chosen by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) as his candidate for Vice-President for his fourth term in 1944, he became President upon FDR’s death in April 1945, as World War II was nearing its end.

Truman, on accession to office, was faced with having to decide major issues of domestic and foreign policy, none more important than whether to use an atomic bomb on Japan in order to bring the war to a quick end. Doing so, he was told, would avoid the countless American casualties necessitated by the alternative option: an invasion of the Japanese homeland.

Truman was a unique individual, a politician with no hint of scandal, who followed one primary guideline in his life and in his decision-making: a determination to do what he felt was “right.” That was, of course, a subjective action, but he lived by a moral code that we should all envy. It was this mix of personal rectitude and truly tough soul-searching, that made him the ideal centerpiece for study and emulation.

Harry understood people. Tested during World War I, he became a recognizable “leader” in the best sense of that word. Men followed him into action—both militarily and practically—understanding that he  would always explore every alternative before acting. He carried this operational code into politics and, when he was chosen to head a Senate Select Committee that explored waste and graft as World War II was being waged, both sides of the aisle applauded his actions. People knew he could be trusted and his constituents and colleagues understood that he could be counted upon to make the right decisions and help guide the Senate and the country accordingly.

Today, in terms of the 15 or so candidates for President on the Democratic side, most either implicitly or publicly self-identify as “Progressive;” none immediately stands out as “Truman-like.” Specific policies on healthcare, the environment, foreign policy, etc, can be labelled as progressive, but motivation is often obscured.

On most of the issues we are still contentiously debating—especially health-care and social justice issues—it was Truman who laid the foundation for future progress. In foreign policy as well, it was Truman who helped create the series of collective alliances (e.g. NATO), that Trump has tried to destroy. The 1947 Marshall Plan was initially designed to stave off hunger, poverty, and economic chaos in post-war Europe. Stability there would, it was hoped, provide a barrier to Soviet encroachment. Truman also supported the creation of Israel, peacefully overcome a Russian blockade of West Berlin, and fought communist aggression in Korea.

So my advice to our next President is clear: read about and learn from Harry Truman. The candidate who bases their campaign platform on the practices and policies of the “Man from Missouri,” will be the true Progressive. If he or she can implement that platform as President, they may also eventually obtain the label “Great” by our nation’s historians.