These are the qualities that make a great leader

Lots of companies make great products. Lots of politicians have potential. But very few people are able to become real, true leaders. Author Simon Sinek spoke with Glenn on TV last night about what it is about great leaders that they all have in common - the answers may surprise you.

A transcript of the segment is below:

Glenn: Okay, I want to introduce you to a new friend, and that probably would’ve caused him some consternation if I would’ve said that a couple months ago, but a new friend and a guy I think we think an awful lot alike and that I think is important for you to know and read. He is the guy who now has Leaders Eat Last, a new book that is out, and also Start with Why. He has changed my life about a year ago or started to clarify what I kind of instinctively knew to be true, and now I think is in the midst of changing my life and really helping me on a path that I think with you we really will be the people that can really change the world.

I want to start, Simon Sinek is his name. I want to start, Simon, first with just a little bit about this vacuum of leadership and this idea that our leaders have failed us and where are the leaders? And we all say, you know, where is Ronald Reagan or where is Margaret Thatcher or where is Pope John Paul? The leaders of the past are gone, but that’s because we’re looking for them. Shouldn’t we be looking for them inside?

Simon: Yeah, I mean, we want to be led. We like leaders, you know? Nobody wants to go to work and be managed. We want to go to work and be led. I think one of the challenges we face is our own definition of leadership. We think that leadership comes with authority, and sometimes it does, and it’s certainly more efficient when a leader has some authority.

But I know many people who sit at the highest levels of whatever organization they run, but they’re not leaders. You know, they have authority, and we do what they tell us because they have authority over us, but we wouldn’t follow them. And I know many people who sit at the bottom of organizations that have no authority, but they’ve made a choice, a choice to look after the person to the left of them and a choice to look after the person to the right of them. And this is basically and fundamentally what leadership is. It is a choice.

Glenn: Are real leaders usually found at times of crisis? Because like September 11 or here I have this whole wall that is Abraham Lincoln’s face, he’s not the guy that you would pick out and go “I’m going to follow that guy,” but it happened on September 11 too. People who were just coworkers all of a sudden took charge and said, “You, you, and you, let’s go.” Are you born a leader?

Simon: Leadership is a skill like any other that some based on how they grew up and the way that they were raised and the sort of lessons they learned from their parents or their grandparents or their friends, you know, they have a talent. They have a talent for it. Some kids are great at basketball, they have a talent for it, and some kids have to work really, really, really hard to get good at basketball. Leadership is the same. It is a skill. Some have a natural capacity for it. Some of us have to work harder at it, but it is a practice. It’s not something we do at work and then we stop being a leader when we leave work.

Glenn: The key principles of leadership?

Simon: The key idea behind leadership is putting the well-being of others sometimes before ourselves, considering the well-being of others. So a great example of how to think about leadership is something I witnessed when I visited Quantico Marine Base which is where the Marines select their officers. And I did not hear a single Marine say the words I am a leader, I want to be a leader, I aspire to be a leader, I think I have what it takes to be a good leader. Those words were never uttered.

The words you do hear are I’m a leader of Marines, I believe I have what it takes to be a leader of Marines, I aspire to be a good leader of Marines. In other words, even in their own vernacular, they see leadership as a service to another human being, a leader of Marines, not just this leader, not this position or title to be held.

And I think that’s what we all have to remember, which is leadership is not a rank to attain, it’s a responsibility. It’s an honor. It’s much like being a parent, you know? The choice to have kids is the fun part. The choice to raise children is the difficult part.

Glenn: I’m amazed because the first time I spoke to you I said the same thing to you about your book, those are all biblical principles, and you’re not coming to it from a place of the Bible, but they’re all universal principles.

Simon: They’re human principles.

Glenn: They’re human principles, but I mean, it is the same as, you know, when Jesus says the first will be last, and you know, she’s greater because she took her hair and washed my feet when that at the time was you wanted to get around those people. But I serve you. I’ll wash your feet, and it’s the same principle back then.

Simon: There is no expectation of anything in return.

Glenn: Right, and back then they didn’t get it, and we still don’t get it.

Simon: And this is why when we find great leaders, the reason we want to follow them is because they serve as the example. They give us permission. They show us what it looks like. They lead the way. You know, leadership comes with risk. You go first means you’re the one who may get in trouble or get your head cut off for taking that risk and –

Glenn: So does good leadership have anything to do with shedding all the trappings of the leaders? I mean, because some people will say well, they’re rich or they’re this or that. You can still be – that doesn’t matter.

Simon: There’s no relationship whatsoever. You know, as a leader, you know, we’re hierarchical animals naturally, and there’s basis for this, which is we used to live in populations no bigger than 150 people. This presents a bit of a problem. You know, these austere times someone brings back food, we all rush in to eat. If you’re lucky enough to be built like a linebacker, you shove your way to the front. If you’re the “artist” of the family, you get an elbow in the face.

This is a bad system for cooperation because the odds are I’m not going to alert the person who punched me in the face this afternoon I’m not going to alert them to danger this evening when they’re sleeping, you know, I’m just going to leave them.

Glenn: Correct.

Simon: So there’s a different system that had to evolve. And we are hierarchical animals. We’re constantly assessing and judging each other, who’s alpha, who’s beta. And when we assess that someone is alpha to us, and sometimes it’s a formal hierarchy, you know, it’s a higher rank, and sometimes it’s an informal thing. And it’s not a constant, it’s a relative system. When we assess that someone is alpha, we voluntarily step back and allow alphas to eat first.

Alphas get first choice of meat and first choice of mate. And so though we may not get the best choice of meat, we will get to eat eventually, and we don’t get an elbow in the face – good system. And to this day this system exists and is alive and well. Not a single person has a problem with somebody more senior than them in the company making a higher salary. That doesn’t bother us. We may think they’re ineffective, we may think they’re an idiot, but it actually doesn’t bother us that they get a higher salary because they’re higher level than us in the company. It doesn’t bother us that they have a bigger office or a better parking space.

Glenn: However, it is in our society being touted as a bad thing.

Simon: And here’s the reason, because none of that stuff comes for free. You see, we are okay with our leaders being given preferential treatment and having the trappings and the perks if they’re willing to uphold their responsibility as a leader. It doesn’t come for free. So the group is not stupid. You see, we expect that when danger threatens the tribe, when danger threatens the group, that it will be the guy who’s stronger, better fed with all that confidence who will rush towards the danger to protect us.

Glenn: So the reason why that’s happening is because the big guys got the bailouts, they all kept their jobs, nobody paid the price, but when there was trouble, they cut all of those jobs down there.

Simon: And this is why we have visceral contempt for some of the banking CEOs and their disproportionate salaries and perks. It’s not the numbers. It’s that they have violated the very human definition of what it means to be a leader. We know that they allowed people to be sacrificed so they could keep what was theirs, or worse, they sacrificed their people so they could keep what was theirs.

What if I told you we were going to give Nelson Mandela $150 million bonus? No big deal. How about Mother Teresa, $250 million bonus? No one has a problem with the numbers or the perks or the better life or the people carrying your bags or calling you sir. No one has an issue with that.

Glenn: In fact, I had a problem when Jimmy Carter wouldn’t carry his bags because I was like he’s the president.

Simon: He’s the president, exactly. The issue we have is when you are given all of those advantages, and you are not willing to uphold the responsibility of the leader, in other words, you think it’s about you.

There was a great story I was told which I’ll share with you which I think encapsulates what it means to be a leader. It was a former undersecretary of defense, and he retired about a year prior. And he was giving a speech at a large conference of about 1,000 people. And he’s standing on the stage giving his prepared remarks sipping his coffee from a Styrofoam cup he had. And he stops and interrupts himself. And he looks down at the cup, and he looks up at the audience.

He says, “You know, I spoke at this exact same conference last year, except last year I was still the undersecretary. And I flew here business-class, and there was someone to meet me at the airport. And they drove me to the hotel. And they’d already checked me in, and they took me up to my room. I came down the next morning, another person was waiting for me, drove me to this same venue. They took me in the back entrance. They took me to the green room, and they gave me a cup of coffee in a beautiful ceramic cup.”

He says, “I’m no longer the undersecretary. I flew here coach. I took a cab from the airport to the hotel. I checked myself in. This morning I took another cab to this venue. I walked in the front door, found my way backstage, and when I asked somebody, ‘Do you have any coffee,’ he pointed to the coffee machine in the corner, and I poured myself a cup of coffee into this here Styrofoam cup.”

He says, “The lesson is the ceramic cup was never meant for me, it was meant for the position I held. I deserve a Styrofoam cup.” And this is the point, I think a lot of people in leadership positions believe that all those perks that are afforded to them are for them. It’s not. It’s for the position they hold. And they have a responsibility, because, by the way, when they leave, they will give those things to the next person.

And I think one of the humilities of leadership is that we have to remember though we were given these things, and we can enjoy them, I mean, let’s be honest, it’s good, it’s nice, it’s good to be the king, it feels good, we get all of these advantages, but it all comes at a price.

First of all, it’s given to the position and not to you, that’s number one. And number two, we have to “pay” for those things by offering and sometimes sacrificing what is in our interest for the good of those around us or the good of those who have committed themselves to see our visions come to life. That’s the responsibility of leadership.

Glenn: We have about three and a half minutes, but I want to tell you real quick you will understand why I’ve been saying about mercy, mercy, mercy, justice and mercy, we have to serve one another, if you read his book, Leaders Eat Last. And if you missed the radio show, listen to I think it was hour one and two today on the radio show, never had a guest on for three hours and did it today, and it’s fantastic.

And it’s really important that you watch that and read his book. Let me ask you this, we’re not people on paper that should be sitting down with each other.

Simon: You and me?

Glenn: Why are you here?

Simon: I’m here for the same reason you’re here, which is one, I have an insatiably curious mind, and I believe that people who have different perspectives than I have have something to teach me that I can learn. I know enough to know that I know very little, that I don’t know everything.

And I think we have a bad habit in this country of listening to the people who tell us what we already agree with or tell us what want to hear because it feels good and because we agree with it. And you know, if your politics are left, you listen to left media, if your politics are right, you listen to right media, and never shall the twain interact or mix.

Glenn: And you don’t put yourself in either of those categories?

Simon: Oh no, I consider myself a common sensist, and I will work with anyone. And I’m very open about it. You know, I’ll get calls from Republicans, and I’ll tell them, yeah, just so you know, I’m going to give the same advice to Democrats. And when Democrats call, I say just so you know, I’m going to give the same advice to Republicans because my goal is that we find common cause and work together.

And so the reason I wanted to meet you was because I was told I should meet you, is because I was told that, you know, you disagree with him. I’m like really? Because I’ve never met him, you know? And we may have not got along, and so I would have wasted an hour of time to find out that I didn’t like him. And instead, I found an hour of time that made me craving wanting more.

And what I love is that you and I seem to represent an example of what the rest of us could do. Instead of hearing the sound bite and forming our opinion and saying, “I hate that person, I hate that side, I hate that group,” to rather say, “I’d like to learn more. I think we both want the same thing.”

Glenn: Without getting into specifics, you and I have had a couple of times where I think both of us have gone either on the phone or in e-mail or something we’ve gone okay, all right, maybe that came out wrong.

Simon: That’s not what I meant.

Glenn: That’s not what I meant.

Simon: Because we find ourselves going at each other and the other one going whoa, that’s not what I meant.

Glenn: Right.

Simon: And I think the things we say are not always the things we mean. Let me rephrase that, the words that people hear are not always what we mean. And so I think it’s the responsibility to try and be as articulate as possible obviously, but I think it’s the responsibility of the listener or the person receiving information to say let me understand what you mean, what do you mean by that, let me repeat back to you in my own words and tell me is this what you’re trying to say? Because I think 99 times out of 100, I think we just completely misunderstand each other.

Glenn: You learn that from any marriage counselor. Anyway, the name of the book is Leaders Eat Last, and Start with Why, either one, both of them, highly recommended. Simon, thank you.

Simon: Thanks for having me, Glenn.

Top THREE reasons we NEED the Panama Canal

Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Is Trump seriously planning a military conquest of the Panama Canal?

In the weeks leading up to the inauguration, Donald Trump launched the Panama Canal into the national spotlight. The canal is one of the most important passages in the world, and its continued operation has been critical for both the U.S. military and economy since its construction.

Since America relinquished sovereignty of the canal, China has asserted its authority in the region. The Chinese Communist Party has been growing its influence in Panama and neighboring Latin American countries, convincing them to join their "Belt and Road Initiative," an effort to poise China as the main economic power in developing nations across the world. Panama in particular is quickly becoming a Chinese puppet state. There are currently over 200,000 Chinese living in Panama, a Chinese company runs two of the canal's five major ports, and another Chinese company provides telecommunication service for a large portion of the canal. The government of Panama has even gone as far as cutting diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

It's clear that the Panama Canal is under serious threat of falling into Chinese hands, but President Trump doesn't intend to let them move in. Here are the top three reasons we need the Panama Canal:

1. The canal was built by the U.S.

Hulton Archive / Stringer | Getty Images

Without the United States, neither Panama nor the Panama Canal would exist. In 1903, after Colombia refused to allow the U.S. to build a canal across the isthmus of Panama, President Teddy Roosevelt devised a controversial plan. He supported a Panamanian independence movement, which swiftly overthrew the local Colombian government. Meanwhile, he stationed a U.S. warship off the coast, preventing Colombia from sending military forces to retake Panama.

The moment Panama declared its independence, the U.S. recognized it and struck a deal with the new government: the U.S. would control the Canal Zone, while Panama would receive $10 million and an annual payment of $250,000. Construction of the canal took over a decade, cost $375 million, and resulted in thousands of American casualties, making it the most expensive U.S. construction project of its time.

Fast forward to 1964 when tensions between the U.S. and Panama over the canal erupted into a riot. President Lyndon B. Johnson decided it was time to transfer control of the canal to Panama. However, this proved more complicated than expected. In 1968, General Omar Torrijos, a known ally of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, seized control of Panama in a coup. Negotiations over the Canal stalled, as many Americans opposed giving such an important asset to a controversial figure. It wasn’t until 1999, following the deployment of 27,000 U.S. troops to facilitate yet another change in power, that the Canal was officially handed over to Panama.

2. The canal is vital for the U.S. economy

IVAN PISARENKO / Contributor | Getty Images

The U.S. relies heavily on the Panama Canal for commercial shipping. Between 13 and 14 thousand ships use the Panama Canal every year, which is roughly 40 percent of the global cargo ship traffic. Additionally, 72 percent of ships traversing the canal are either heading toward or leaving a U.S. port.

The time ships save using the Panama Canal reduces shipping costs massively. For example, when the canal first opened in 1922, it was estimated that a ship’s journey from Oregon to the UK, was shortened by 42 percent, reducing costs by 31 percent. If the Panama Canal was blocked or destroyed, or if American merchant vessels were denied passage, the effects on the U.S. economy would be tremendous.

3. The canal is a key defense point for the U.S. military

Historical / Contributor | Getty Images

Similarly, the canal is key to the U.S. military and national security. The canal shaves off approximately 8,000 miles of the voyage between the Pacific and the Atlantic. If U.S. Navy ships were denied access in a time of crisis, the extra time required to bypass the canal would be disastrous. Conversely, if the U.S. can keep the Panama Canal from being used by foreign aggressors, it would provide a massive advantage in future conflicts.

A foreign enemy could easily exploit the canal's current vulnerability. This was proven in 2021 when a cargo ship accidentally blocked the Suez Canal for a week, paralyzing global trade. Imagine China intentionally sabotaging the Panama Canal, considering it controls ports on both ends, owns a bridge that spans the Canal, provides its telecom services, and has the second-largest fleet of ships using the route.

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

After an eventful first week in office, JD Vance wrapped the week up with a bang of an interview on "Face the Nation."

Last weekend, Vice President Vance joined "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan, who drilled Vance on everything from the economy to immigration. Vance clapped back with polite yet cutting responses, and he defended Trump against some of her more accusatory queries.

If there was any lingering doubt that JD Vance wasn't vice presidential (or presidential) material, they have just been blown away. Here are the major takeaways from his electricinterview on Sunday:

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Brennan opened the interview with a barrage of questions that brought up concerns surrounding some of Trump's cabinet picks, specifically Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard.

Brennan began by questioning how effective Pete Hegseth could be as Secretary of Defence, given that he was confirmed with a tie in the Senate that VP Vance broke. Vance responded with a quick breakdown of all of the issues the military is currently facing. Vance argued that Hegseth's unpopularity in the Senate results from his being a disruptor.

Brennan also attacked Tulsi Gabbard, calling her unfit for the title of "Director of National Intelligence." Vance defended Gabbard, citing her formidable resume and strong character. Vance also discussed the corruption of our intelligence services, which out-of-control bureaucrats have weaponized against the interests of the American people. He expressed his belief that Gabbard would be the right person to reign in the corruption and return the National Intelligence Service to its intended purpose.

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan pushed Vance on the economy, specifically questioning when prices for consumer goods would begin to fall. Vance explained that within the plethora of executive orders issued by Trump during his first week in office, many were aimed at bringing more jobs back into America, which will raise wages and lower prices. Other orders will boost energy production, which will reduce energy costs and decrease the costs of goods.

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

ROBYN BECK / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan drilled Vance on President Trump's proposed FEMA reforms, specifically regarding Trump's suggestion to send states a percentage of federal disaster relief funds so that they can quickly distribute aid rather than wait on federal action. While Brennen argued that FEMA has specialists and resources that states would not have access to, leaving people without aid, Vance argued that recent disasters, like Hurricane Helene, have proven that FEMA's current bureaucratic red tape deprived Americans of immediate aid when they needed it most.

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance defended Trump's decision to allow ICE to conduct raids into churches and schools against Brennen's criticisms, arguing that law enforcement should remove a dangerous criminal from a school or church, regardless of their immigration status. He also advocated for Trump's proposed changes to birthright citizenship to prevent illegal immigrants from abusing the constitutional amendment by having "anchor babies" on U.S. soil.

Vance also took a hard stance supporting Trump suspension of admitting Afghan refugees. Brennan argued that Afghan refugees were going through a thorough vetting process and were now being abandoned by the U.S. However, Vance cited the foiled terrorist attack in Oklahoma City during Trump's 2024 campaign that was orchestrated by an Afghan refugee, who was allegedly vetted by federal agents. The vetting process is clearly flawed, and it was a prudent decision to halt the admission of these refugees until further notice.

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

To wrap up the interview, Brennan questioned the Trump administration's stance on Big Tech given the attendance of the industry's biggest names at Trump's inauguration, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Vance assured Brennan that Trump is still resolved to curb the power and influence of Big Tech.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.