In the history of politics, strongmen generally have such a poor record that it's surprising how people continue to fall for them. The depressing fact may be that humans simply don't learn from history. Or that not enough of them know enough history to learn anything from it. In fact, spin a globe and press your finger against it until it stops and wherever your fingers end up you're likely to find a nation that has suffered under a strongman.

In the history of politics, strongmen generally have such a poor record that it�s surprising how people continue to fall for them. The depressing fact may be that humans simply don�t learn from history. Or that not enough of them know enough history to learn anything from it.

In country after country, strongmen have been the ruin of the nation, with recent examples in Venezuela, Cuba, Libya, Zimbabwe and Syria. In the recent past, strongmen have spelled misery for Germany, the former Soviet Union, Spain, Uganda and Italy. In fact, spin a globe and press your finger against it until it stops and wherever your fingers end up you�re likely to find a nation that has suffered under a strongman.

The United States, thanks mostly to a governmental structure bolstered by checks on power, has largely been immune to the strongman syndrome. But that system is being tested by Donald Trump, presumptive Republican nominee for president. He so far has proved that the large numbers of the current population of the United States know nothing of the disastrous history of strongmen. And there is no question that he admires strongmen and aspires to be one.

He has made no bones about his admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is a thug within and without the borders of Russia. Even when Trump criticizes foreign thugs, his admiration shows through, as detailed in a recent ABC News story about his pronouncements on Putin, North Korea�s Kim Jong Un, the late Muammar Ghadafi of Libya, embattled Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, and, just this week, the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Of the latter, Trump said, "We shouldn't have destabilized Saddam Hussein, right. He was a bad guy, really bad guy. But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists," Trump said. "He did that so good. They didn't read them the rights. They didn't talk. They were terrorists. Over.�

That should be particularly worrisome for Muslim-Americans, since Trump sees them as a potential fifth column and has previously has said that in fighting terrorists, it is OK to attack their families, too.

The thrust of Trump�s campaign is all about what he would do, what he would negotiate, what he would fix or build or tear up. He obviously sees himself as a strong man, and there is no reason to believe that he suddenly would become a champion of checks and balances and constitutional rights if he were elected president.

In this, as in so many other ways, Trump stands outside the longstanding traditions of presidential candidates, who always have felt an obligation to extol democracy, bipartisanship and respect for rights, even if the words were uttered with something less than sincerity.

Over the course of nation�s history, presidents of both parties already have vastly expanded the power of the presidency while eroding that of Congress. Looking at the foreign thugs Trump admires, it is clear what he aspires to.

He wants to rule unilaterally, and by doing so, he claims he will make the nation great again. All he needs is for voters to hand him the keys to the White House and he�ll take it from there. And a dismaying number of Americans seem ready to do just that.