Donald Trump vs. Volodymyr Zelenskyy: Who was the brighter student?
In the midst of global attention on Ukraine, the world witnessed a high-stakes gathering at the White House, where President Donald Trump hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky alongside top European leaders.
Trump announced preparations for a potential face-to-face meeting between Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin, aiming to explore a pathway to end Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine.
The discussions, marked by unease in Europe over possible concessions, underscored not only the gravity of the conflict but also the contrasting temperaments and strategic instincts of the two leaders. Against this backdrop of diplomacy and tension, an intriguing question emerges: Beyond politics and power plays, who was the brighter student, Trump, the New York businessman turned president, or Zelenskyy, the entertainer turned wartime leader? Examining their formative years, education, and early intellectual development offers a unique lens into the skills that would later define their leadership on the global stage.
Early life and family background
Donald John Trump, born in 1946 in New York City, was the fourth child of a wealthy real estate family. Surrounded by privilege, he became a millionaire in inflation-adjusted terms by age eight. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, born in 1978 in Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine, grew up in a family of academics and engineers, with his father heading a university department and his mother a retired engineer. While Trump's upbringing emphasized business exposure and wealth, Zelenskyy's environment stressed education, discipline, and resilience, shaped by family history and wartime legacies.
Educational journeys
Trump began his schooling at the Kew-Forest School before transferring to New York Military Academy, a boarding school focused on discipline, athletics, and competition. He later attended Fordham University and transferred to the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, graduating with a Bachelor of Science in economics in 1968. Zelenskyy, conversely, pursued law at the Kryvyi Rih Institute of Economics.
Although he never practiced law, this formal education laid the groundwork for his analytical and strategic thinking, which would later serve him in politics.
Academic performance and student persona
As a student, Trump was an average performer academically, though he excelled in sports and demonstrated early leadership tendencies, particularly in baseball. Zelenskyy's legal training required rigorous intellectual engagement, honing his problem-solving and communication skills.
While Trump's student life emphasized confidence and pragmatic skill-building, Zelenskyy's emphasized analytical rigor and creativity.
From classroom to career
Trump leveraged his education into the family business, building a career in real estate, media, and eventually politics. His academic record was modest, but his real-world experience shaped his bold, risk-taking persona. Zelenskyy applied his learning differently, co-founding the Kvartal 95 production company and creating the hit TV series Servant of the People, demonstrating ingenuity, strategic thinking, and leadership long before entering politics.
Comparative assessment
If brilliance is measured by traditional academics and analytical ability, Zelenskyy's law background suggests an edge. If brilliance is assessed through practical acumen, risk-taking, and self-marketing, Trump's early immersion in high-stakes business proves formidable. Their divergent paths reveal two types of preparation for power: one through wealth, confidence, and public persona; the other through intellect, creativity, and adaptability.
Conclusion
Ultimately, Trump and Zelenskyy exemplify contrasting models of student brilliance. Trump's trajectory reflects privilege, strategic risk-taking, and self-promotion. Zelenskyy's, in contrast, reflects intellectual discipline, creativity, and adaptive intelligence. Both cultivated the skills that would define their public and political lives, yet through distinctly different lenses of preparation.
Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
a few seconds ago
- News18
"Only Way Democrats Can Get Elected" Does Donald Trump Have The Power To Ban Mail-In Ballots?
"Only Way Democrats Can Get Elected" Does Donald Trump Have The Power To Ban Mail-In Ballots? | 4K Last Updated: Crux Videos President Donald Trump plans to get rid of mail-in ballots ahead of the 2026 elections for the House of Representatives and Senate. "An executive order is being written right now by the best lawyers in the country to end mail-in ballots because they're corrupt," Trump said. During a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House, Trump also showed a political motivation, saying that mail-in voting is "the only way" Democrats "can get elected". With Democratic voters traditionally more likely to use mail-in ballots than Republicans, Trump's pledge is his latest effort to reshape the midterm election battlefield to his party's advantage. n18oc_world n18oc_crux
News18
9 minutes ago
- News18
Judge Rejects DOJ's Bid to Unseal Epstein Records, Calls It Diversion Tactic
Last Updated: Criticism has mounted against former President Donald Trump and the DOJ for their decision earlier this year not to make the Epstein files public. A US federal judge has rejected the Justice Department's latest attempt to unseal grand jury records related to Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking case. On Wednesday, US District Judge Richard Berman, based in Manhattan, ruled against the Department of Justice (DOJ), stating that the Trump administration is in a better position to release materials concerning the late financier and convicted sex offender, reported Reuters. The judge turned down the motion to unseal the grand jury indictment from 2019, criticising the DOJ's approach as a distraction. 'The instant grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the Government's possession," Berman wrote in his decision. He pointed out that the Trump administration had already chosen not to release those files in July despite its own investigation. Criticism has mounted against former President Donald Trump and the DOJ for their decision earlier this year not to make the Epstein files public. In July, Trump instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek court approval to unseal grand jury materials. However, grand jury proceedings, designed to protect the integrity of criminal investigations, cannot be made public without judicial approval. During his 2024 election campaign, Trump had vowed to release the Epstein files, claiming that Democrats were concealing the truth. However, the DOJ's July memo dismissed the existence of any so-called 'Epstein client list" and reiterated that Epstein died by suicide while awaiting trial. Epstein was arrested on federal charges of sex trafficking minors but was found dead in his jail cell in 2019. He had pleaded not guilty at the time of his arrest. His sudden death, coupled with his connections to high-profile political and business figures, sparked a wave of conspiracy theories alleging a cover-up. On August 11, another Manhattan judge, Paul Engelmayer, similarly rejected a DOJ request to unseal grand jury evidence related to Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's longtime associate. Maxwell, who was convicted of recruiting and grooming underage girls for Epstein, is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence. She had pleaded not guilty and, after losing an appeal, has requested the US Supreme Court to review her case. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Loading comments...
Time of India
11 minutes ago
- Time of India
The vanishing promise: How Trump's visa policies are pushing talent away from US campuses
The United States has long sold itself as the world's premier destination for higher education, a place where students from every corner of the globe could bring their dreams, talent, and ambition. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now But that promise is fading. A mix of visa delays, travel bans, and political hostility under President Donald Trump has reshaped the international student experience, and pushed thousands of aspiring scholars to look elsewhere. From dream to dead end For decades, international students formed a cornerstone of American higher education. According to The New York Times, nearly one million were studying in the US just a year ago, and universities — from Columbia to Purdue to Arizona State, relied on them not just for their talent but also for the financial stability they brought. Many paid full tuition, subsidizing aid for domestic students and funding crucial research. But Trump's policies flipped the script. Students from Iran, Afghanistan, and other countries directly impacted by the administration's travel bans found themselves locked out. Even those from top-sending nations like India and China, who make up the bulk of America's international student body, were slowed down by bottlenecked visa appointments and heightened scrutiny. In some months, there were no student visa slots available at all. The Institute of International Education , in a survey of more than 500 US universities, found that over a third reported a dip in international applications last year, the steepest drop since the pandemic. NAFSA , a leading association for international educators, projected that if these problems persisted, new enrollment could fall by as much as 40% this fall, a staggering 150,000 students lost. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now 'They're literally some of the best in the world' The biggest loss, educators warn, is not financial, it's intellectual. Wendy Wolford, vice provost for international affairs at Cornell University, told The New York Times that 'they're literally some of the best in the world.' Students arriving from abroad enrich classrooms, contribute to groundbreaking research, and expose peers to new perspectives. Their absence, Wolford said, diminishes US campuses and curtails the country's soft power, as fewer students return home carrying goodwill for America. But many students now feel unwelcome. The Trump administration's rhetoric often painted them as security risks or competitors taking slots from US citizens. 'We have people who want to go to Harvard and other schools, they can't get in because we have foreign students there,' Trump argued at one point. Policies followed words. Visas were revoked by the thousands, more than 6,000 in a single year. Students caught up in deportation threats described the process as opaque, while immigration lawyers said many cases seemed ideological. According to The New York Times, o ne Iranian student, Noushin, who secured admission to the University of South Carolina, has been waiting months in 'administrative processing.' On Telegram, she discovered hundreds of others in similar limbo. A chilling effect The fear is not only about entry but also about what comes after. Some students who managed to secure visas worried about being 'trapped', unable to travel home for holidays or apply for internships without risking their status. Others abandoned US universities altogether, choosing institutions in Europe or Asia instead. 'The rules of the game changed dramatically,' Wolford told The New York Times. Trump's travel bans made matters worse. Afghan women awarded full scholarships in the US found themselves unable to attend because visas were simply impossible to obtain. Iranian students, despite winning admission and funding, were stuck abroad while their American peers moved ahead in research labs. Even universities scrambled for solutions. Cornell, for instance, offered affected students the chance to begin the semester at partner campuses in Scotland, Hong Kong, or South Korea. Few took up the offer. Most either held out hope for US visas, or simply gave up. What's at stake The ripple effects stretch far beyond enrollment charts. Losing international students means losing top-tier researchers, engineers, and innovators, many of whom might otherwise stay in the US to fuel its workforce and economy. 'Students like me are not a threat to U.S. society,' Pouria, an Iranian doctoral admit stuck in visa delays, told The New York Times . His research, backed by the Texas Department of Transportation, now risks stalling. For decades, the US higher education system has thrived precisely because it attracted global talent. Now, as students turn away in response to Trump-era policies, other countries are seizing the opportunity. European and Asian universities are seeing the benefits of American hesitation. The question lingers: Will the US regain its role as the beacon for global talent, or will the vanishing promise of its universities become permanent? TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us
