"Official" portraits of Presidents and people of political impact are exercises in imagery, of branding. What does a picture say about meaning and substance?
 |
Consider these; people of image only or of substance, of accomplishment?
 |
And what of this?
Does he mean to portray trustworthy service-leadership? Or fearsome, watch-your-step power?
What sort of sophomoric play-acting is this?
The question now before America: is this a man of imagery or of substance?
PS: Mandate? Hardly: Trump/Vance = 49.30% of the popular vote; Harris/Walz. 48.32%; others, 2.38%. We are still a people betwixt and between.
