I’m getting ready for the Donald’s concession speech and I want to study a bit about successful defeats. If Donald Trump is setting up his children for future potential elections, then even a defeat at this level would be a victory if his children end up being successful.
I’m interested in similar examples where a loss was called a win or later recognized as being a stepping stone to victory.
Sports legends, military, elections, fantasy, or any kind of story would be great.
This happens pretty routinely in dictatorships. To this day, Egypt celebrates victory in the Yom Kippur War, even though their victory was entirely temporary. They celebrate the opening offensive of the war, and entirely “neglect” the second half where they got their asses handed to them.
For Trump, I can entirely see him shifting the goalposts and saying something like his real goal was to shake up the Republican party or prove that an outsider could make it in politics, and that he was never interested in the presidency to begin with.
Germany and Japan probably got a lot more benefit from losing World War II than they would have from winning it.
Unfortunately, speeches do not equal victory or defeat.
Well, look at the elections of 1964 and 1972. Goldwater and McGovern were crushed. They lost in humiliating fashion.
And yet… looking back, you’d have to say that each man remade his party. The GOP moved in Goldwater’s direction and the Democrats moved in McGovern’s. So, in the long run, were they really such losers?
Now, outside politics, there are many instances in history of the losing army being celebrated and turned into legends while the winners were forgotten.
The Spartans LOST at Thermopylae and were all killed. Same with the Texans at the Alamo. But they’ve become icons.
How about Dunkirk? Strictly speaking, that was a German victory and a big defeat for Britain and France. But thanks to the semi-successful evacuation, it became one of England’s Finest Hours in legend.
That’s almost a dictionary definition for the OP. “Semi-successful” doesn’t even scratch the surface. They managed to get 340,000 troops out with only 35,000 surrendering to the oncoming Germans. Those figures could so easily have been reversed.
If Germany capture all (or a large proportion) of those troops, Britain would very likely have sued for some sort of arrangement with Herr Hitler.
They didn’t, so we didn’t and he was forced to fight on two fronts. From that point on he couldn’t win.
Trump has won, it’s a question of degrees now …
The GOP will change, rejection of political elites is established, the working class and young have set their terms, Trump has fundamentally changed the national political landscape.
Apollo 13. It was a “defeat” in that it failed in it’s mission to reach the Moon. It was a “victory” because they managed to bring the astronauts home in one piece.
Similar example with Ernest Shackleton’s South Pole expedition.
The Alamo
What if it ends up being a victory speech?
Whenever he lost a state during the primary, he would say that the system was rigged or that the other guy who won cheated. I feel fairly certain he’ll be saying the same thing on election night.
He is already saying it.
Trump: ‘I’m afraid the election’s going to be rigged’
And so are his proxies.
"I think we have widespread voter fraud…
He is either preparing to challenge the election or inciting his so-called “alt-right” supporters to violence should he lose.
Matches his personality. Even if he loses he’ll make you sorry you messed with him, and up front he has declared he can’t lose a fair fight. As mentioned elsewhere, it’s all about displaying dominance for him.
My two cents? Trump knows he’s going to lose and lose badly. His talk about rigged elections is his way of cushioning the blow for his followers, and telling them “We WOULD win a fair election, but since it’s not fair, I’m gonna get creamed.”
And what’s sad is that the doofi who constitute his base will believe it and thus be even more alienated from the process.
We can have a new thread about how a win is really a loss.
Thanks for all of the great replies.
Strictly speaking, the 1968 Tet Offensive was a defeat for North Vietnam, as they suffered high casualties and failed to hold any of their targets.
However, it was a defeat for South Vietnam/U.S. in that they had been insisting that NV was crushed and unable to mount any kind of invasion, particularly one that struck at so many targets simultaneously.
A similar theme is the Gallipoli Campaign WWI April-1915 to January 1916.
An operational failure on almost every level apart from the evauation, and yet it forms the centre piece of the ANZAC legend and ANZAC Day and is celebrated as a national holiday both here in Aust and NZ.
They already are, which is why they’re voting for a protest candidate to begin with.
I have some sympathy for Republican voters. For decades they’ve been told by their elected representatives that wealth only requires effort and poverty is just the result of sloth. And that’s fine, when your electorate is doing ok. Globalization is ultimately desirable and irreversible regardless. However, it is creating winners and losers and neither party has been good at mitigating it’s consequences or stumping for it’s necessity.
The man is full of shit too, but voters for Trump are hurting and they are just tired of being told it’s their fault.