Everyone will eventually turn on Trump. Even Steve Doocy.

dandyfopp

Everyone will eventually turn on Trump. Even Steve Doocy.


https://theweek.com/articles/858707/everyone-eventually-turn-trump-even-steve-doocy-


It's too soon to say when Donald Trump's presidency will end, but it's not too soon to say how it will end. It will end in disgrace. And when it does, Trump's defenders will turn on him.

Some already have. On Sunday, Anthony Scaramucci, Trump's former communications director, said that Republicans should "replace the top of the ticket in 2020."

Former White House aide and Apprentice contestant Omarosa Manigault never had a bad word to say about Trump when she worked for him. Trump said he hired her "because she said GREAT things about me." But after she left the White House, she said Trump was "mentally impaired" and accused him of saying the N-word.

Michael Cohen, Trump's former personal attorney, said he was "mesmerized" by Trump when he worked for him. It wasn't until after Cohen quit working for Trump and was sentenced to prison — as a result, in part, of lying for Trump — that he ceased to be mesmerized and instead became disgusted. In congressional testimony, he called Trump a "racist," a "cheat," and a "conman."

Trump's sycophants are as loyal as he is — which is to say, not at all. In The Art of the Deal, Trump counted Roy Cohn as a friend, calling him "a truly loyal guy." After Cohn contracted AIDS, Trump "dropped him like a hot potato," according to Susan Bell, Cohn's longtime secretary. That's the kind of friend Trump is — the kind you don't want.

The people who are loyal to Trump are loyal not because they like him as a person but because they have something to gain from him. In an interview with The New York Times, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) admitted that he embraced Trump "to try to be relevant." So far, his plan has worked superbly — Graham has a recurring slot on Hannity. Once Trump is gone, however, Graham will no longer need the man he once dismissed as "the world's biggest jackass." He will find someone else to latch onto, and he will forget about Trump just as he forgot about John McCain.

Trump's cult of personality is a cult of power-worshippers. "It is the place and power we bow to, not the man," William Hazlitt wrote in his 1823 essay "On the Spirit of Monarchy." When Trump is deprived of his place and power, people will stop bowing to him.

Trump's post-presidency will be sadder and more pathetic than his presidency. His presidential library will be neither presidential nor a library. His memoir, if someone writes one for him, will be dreadful — ghostwritten, poorly written, replete with falsehoods and errors, and bereft of insights and useful information. His presidential papers will contain such statements as "Horseface"; "trade wars are good, and easy to win"; "a very stable genius"; and "your favorite President, me!" No mainstream public figure will want to be associated with his legacy.

In February, 157 scholars ranked Trump as the third-worst president in U.S. history. And it's not just the eggheads who disapprove of him. According to Gallup, 54 percent of Americans disapprove of his presidency. Trump has averaged the lowest approval rating of any president in history. Unlike his predecessors, Trump doesn't need a war or a recession to be unpopular — he just needs himself. And unlike his predecessors, Trump won't improve his public standing as a private citizen.

After resigning in disgrace, Richard Nixon partially rehabilitated himself. He wrote a 1,120-page memoir and a succession of books about foreign policy. He counseled presidents and appeared on serious news programs to opine on world events. Time columnist Hugh Sidey, who had chided Nixon during Watergate, called him a "strategic genius." President Clinton gave Nixon a fawning eulogy.

Jimmy Carter is widely regarded as having been a better ex-president than a president. His approval rating rose from 31 percent in 1980 to 64 percent in 2009, thanks largely to his humanitarian work. According to The Washington Post, he "helped renovate 4,300 homes in 14 countries for Habitat for Humanity." Trump, on the other hand, reportedly appropriated money meant for a children's cancer charity.

In the early republic, ex-presidents returned to private life. That changed with John Quincy Adams, who broke with tradition and entered the U.S. House of Representatives. Over time, ex-presidents began to monetize their experience. In 1885, Ulysses S. Grant sold his memoirs for $450,000. Nixon received a $2.5 million advance for his. Clinton made millions of dollars giving speeches.

Trump will try to profit, too, of course. He already runs an online store on his personal website, where you can purchase a MAGA bathing suit for $55 and a "WITCH HUNT" coffee mug for $30. But the market for Trump regalia will shrink when he's out of office. Of his poorly educated supporters, how many will spend $30 on a memoir they won't read? Who will pay to hear Trump blabber about nothing when he already does that for free? Won't people tire of him?

They already are. On his wife's birthday last year, Trump called Fox & Friends and rambled for so long that the hosts didn't know how to get rid of him. After waiting patiently for 30 minutes, Brian Kilmeade politely informed the unhinged man on the other line that he probably had "a billion things" to do that day, his being president and all.

After Trump leaves office and has fewer things to do, people will have fewer reasons to listen to him. Ex-President Trump will call Fox & Friendsevery morning, but they will ignore him. Instead of ranting on air, he will leave voicemails for Steve Doocy's assistant's intern.

SaveComment4Like3
Comments (4)
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Delilah66

“Of his poorly educated supporters, how many will spend $30 on a memoir they won't read?”

The book will be an easy read: all memes. lol

7 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
catkinZ8a

By the same author:


Just Say Yes to Cynicism

By WINDSOR MANN

June 19, 2014 1:00 PM


During a Q-and-A session on Tumblr last week, President Obama complained to young people about young people. “You guys,” he said, “are fed a lot of cynicism every single day about how nothing works and big institutions stink and government is broken, and so you channel a lot of your passion and energy into various private endeavors.” This, apparently, is a bad thing, because it suggests that young people are insufficiently naïve about their politicians. That they are aware of the government’s failures makes it much, much harder to con them. As Obama sees it, the blame lies not with the government for failing but with the cynics who point out its failures.


Obama’s anti-cynicism is one of his signature themes. When running for president in 2007, he said his rival was “not other candidates” but “cynicism” itself. The rivalry is intensifying. Because his policies have failed so demonstrably, Obama, unable to persuade via argument, is resorting to his favorite non-argument: being against people who are against things.


Speaking to Democratic donors in Maryland last month, Obama said the GOP has been “captured by ideologues whose core premise is ‘no’ — who fundamentally believe that the problem is government.” Not only have they said no to Obamacare, but “they’ve said no to helping kids afford college,” Obama said at another fundraiser several weeks earlier. You do recall the “Just Say No to College” plank in the GOP platform, don’t you?


In his speech last month, Obama tried to sound a bipartisan note by praising three Republicans, all of them dead: Abraham Lincoln, who, Obama said, “thought infrastructure was a pretty good idea”; Theodore Roosevelt, who “thought conservation was a pretty smart thing”; and Dwight Eisenhower, who “thought it made sense for us [i.e., the federal government] to invest in science and education” (never mind that Eisenhower warned against “a scientific-technological elite”).


The implication was that today’s Republicans are somehow “against” infrastructure, the environment, science, and education. But the debate is not about whether roads, trees, and schools are worth having but about what the federal government can and should do about them. Its track record does not inspire.


Consider the federal government’s largest undertaking in the last half-century: the war on poverty. Proclaimed 50 years ago, it is still going on, with no end in sight. Forty-four years after Lyndon Johnson declared an “unconditional war on poverty in America,” then–presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said that, if elected, she would appoint “a cabinet-level position that will be solely and fully devoted to ending poverty as we know it in America.” She should have listened to Jimmy Carter, who in 1978 proclaimed before Congress, “Government cannot eliminate poverty.” For once, Carter was right.


But what is realism to most is cynicism to Obama. In his view, cynicism about the government, not the government itself, is the real problem.


At the Democratic National Convention two years ago, Obama said that Republicans believe the government “should do almost nothing.” If this were true, which it isn’t, it would put Republicans in the same ideological camp as the dead white men who wrote the Constitution. Nothing to be ashamed about.


Obama insists that voters want what the Democrats are offering. “On issue after issue,” he said, “people believe what we believe. But what they don’t really believe at this point is that government can get anything done.” Quite true, which is why trust in government is declining and why, in 2012, Americans elected a Democratic president and a Republican Congress — because, having experienced the unitary government of the Obama-Pelosi years, they wanted to stop the government from doing anything else. They voted for gridlock, and a divided government is the best way to get it.


All indications suggest that Obama believes in the two-party system, provided that both parties subscribe to the same platform — namely, his. “I actually want an effective, serious, patriotic, capable, sober-minded Republican party,” he said. Note the adjectives. Obama seems to be saying that patriotism — along with seriousness and sobriety – is attained, or at least enhanced, by agreeing with him. But the first adjective is the most asinine. According to Obama, the way for Republicans to be “effective” is to stop opposing him so effectively.


Democrats have been saying this for decades. In 1950 — at the height of Democratic hegemony — liberal historian and Kennedy sycophant Arthur Schlesinger Jr. penned an essay titled “The Need for an Intelligent Opposition,” in which he advised Republicans to be more like the Democrats. That is more or less what they did under Eisenhower, whose acceptance of the New Deal gave it bipartisan legitimacy.


Obama wants some bipartisan legitimacy for his own programs, particularly Obamacare, which passed through Congress without a single Republican vote. But rather than moderating his positions, the president is denouncing “cynicism,” as if cynicism per se were a bad thing. Obviously, it matters what one is cynical about, and whether the cynicism is warranted. When Obama says that cynicism “is always good for Republicans because it means folks don’t vote,” it’s hard not to be cynical about his anti-cynicism – and proud of the young folks who refuse to swallow what he is trying to feed them.


— Windsor Mann is the editor of The Quotable Hitchens: From Alcohol to Zionism. Follow him on Twitter @WindsorMann.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/06/just-say-yes-cynicism-windsor-mann/


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
JodiK

He's already irrelevant. as far as I'm concerned. He's always been irrelevant. He has nothing even remotely intelligent to impart. And he is a conman, a cheat, a liar, and someone I wouldn't want within the same zip code, never mind within the same social circle!


I suppose one could always use his memoir as something to start the fireplace with...


8 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lurker111

Hehehe. :)

1 Like Save    

Related Stories

Most Popular Slow Living 101: Tips for Turning Off the Chaos
It may feel as though you're too busy to slow down and enjoy life. But even little changes can have a big effect
Full Story
Data Watch Houzz Survey Results: Remodeling Likely to Trump Selling in 2014
Most homeowners say they’re staying put for now, and investing in features to help them live better and love their homes more
Full Story
Your First House Modern Party Etiquette for Hosts and Guests
Learn the mannerly way to handle invitations, gifts and even mishaps for a party that's memorable for the right reasons
Full Story
Most Popular The 15 Most Popular Closet Luxuries on Houzz
Turn distressing disarray into streamlined perfection with closet organizers and amenities like these
Full Story
Gardening 101 Get on a Composting Kick (Hello, Free Fertilizer!)
Quit shelling out for pricey substitutes that aren’t even as good. Here’s how to give your soil the best while lightening your trash load
Full Story
Most Popular How to Add a Skylight or Light Tube
New project for a new year: Increase daylight and maybe even your home’s energy efficiency by opening a room to the sky
Full Story
Most Popular Decorating Master Class: 10 Common Mistakes and How to Fix Them
Turn your styling errors into successes with these solutions — and the help of a designer
Full Story
Gardening 101 How to Grow Your Own Sweet Summer Crops
Got a garden patch and a hankering for the freshest veggies and berries? This guide will get even urban gardeners farming
Full Story
Kitchen Workbook 3 Steps to Choosing Kitchen Finishes Wisely
Lost your way in the field of options for countertop and cabinet finishes? This advice will put your kitchen renovation back on track
Full Story