Pay attention to 1948: lessons for our upcoming Presidential election are there to be learned. Harry Truman was President. Selected by Franklin Roosevelt to be his merely-acceptable candidate for the Vice-Presidency four years earlier, he succeeded to the top spot upon FDR’s death in April 1945. During his first three years in office, he had to decide the most momentous of issues, among them bringing World War II to a close on acceptable terms; use of an Atomic Bomb against Japan; massive aid to Europe and Turkey to stave off Soviet threats; a Russian blockade of Berlin by the Russians; whether to support the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine; massive labor unrest at home; housing and job shortages for returning troops; widespread discrimination towards people of color; and on and on.

Truman had held a number of political offices before becoming a U.S. Senator and then Vice-President. Never attending college, he was a voracious reader, especially of history and biography. Common sense and a desire to always “do what was right,” guided him in his decision-making. Those were probably the two variables most responsible for his decency and success. Yet, by 1947, following congressional elections a year earlier that went against the Democrats, few gave him much chance of being elected President in 1948.

While this very typical man bore little resemblance to Donald Trump in terms of their respective biographies, today’s political climate bears similarities. For example, the country remains uneasy, both economically and politically. The American people, for the most part, look to their leaders for solutions yet perceive individuals not up to the job.

Trump, as polls reveal, is highly unpopular among most Americans, yet maintains a core of supporters comprising about 40% of the electorate. Truman’s popularity was more episodic, but few gave him a chance of success, especially against the perennial Republican candidate, Thomas E. Dewey,  the Governor of New York, who was defeated by Roosevelt in 1944.

In 2016, most people considered the possible election of Donald Trump as a bad joke. Truman was not perceived in the same way, but he was regarded as too “common” and unsuited to continue in office. Well, in both cases we know how the respective election turned out. Why?

Harry Truman’s success in 1948 was the result, in many ways, of an electorate that recognized in the President someone who espoused their own concerns and expectations for the future. Trump, although a dangerous fool, understood people’s fears of “the other,” whether those fears comprised ethnicity, religion, economic and political concerns, etc. He played to them well, especially in those states where his base resides.

Also, and I cannot stress enough this factor’s importance, both Truman with Dewey, and Trump with Clinton, faced overconfident opponents that ran inept campaigns. Neither Dewey nor Clinton worked especially hard, nor believed they would lose. We know the results. Obviously, we were lucky that Truman was the kind of person he was. But, with Trump, a pathological narcissist who makes decisions in terms of what’s best for him and not the country, we will be in existential trouble if he is re-elected. So,  Democrats, pay attention. Run your Presidential campaign(s) based upon John F. Kennedy’s much cited message from his 1961 Inaugural Address: “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” Appeal to people’s core needs, not their hatred and fears. To do the latter, plays into Trump’s strategy for re-election. If we are not careful, it will work.