I was a kid when I watched the 1948 Communist May Day parade in NYC and they were chanting:
"2, 4, 6, 8 Henry Wallace in '48!"
At the end of the parade, a bunch of stevedores showed up shouting:
"2, 4, 6, 8 Henry Wallace suffocate!"
Then the fists and truncheons flew and the mounted police came charging in. Quite a show.
Years later in a college level Poly Sci class, we discussed whether the office made the man or vice versa. In Truman's case, we decided that the office made the man as Truman, IMO, was a party hack who was rewarded for being faithful and ended up doing a pretty good job. Much like Ford was in later years, only the office didn't have much to work with and failed in that case.
I strongly disagree. Though he was a failure in business, he had great personal integrity (as evidenced by his insistence of repaying all his creditors, rather than escaping through bankruptcy) and leadership skills, as displayed by his reputation with the men he commanded during WWI during and well after the war.
While he was "Pendergast's man," Perndergast needed him FOR his honesty. He would hold Pendergast's feet to the flame when he'd try to pressure Truman to accept graft. The best example of this was the job Truman did to cut back on political corruption and kickbacks during the war effort while he was a senator.
Mark