“If the president succeeds, the nation succeeds” has long been a philosophy fervently embraced by supporters of America’s sitting commander-in-chief, particularly when he (or perhaps someday she) encounters rough political waters.
Such conventional wisdom makes both logical and political sense, at least on the surface. Implicit in this philosophy is the inference anyone hoping the president fails is unpatriotic, un-American, ungodly, or some horrific combination of the three.
Each of America’s last three presidents entered the White House after far fewer than 50% of the nation’s eligible electorate voted for him. That’s led to exponential growth in the hate and suspicion-creating business, one that’s generating obscene profits for Internet, Cable TV, and talk radio bomb throwers. The alarming influence high decibel, truth-challenged extremists wield over a still-increasing bloc of Americans unable or unwilling to think for themselves creates a need for the president to play defense, and in the past the, “If he succeeds, we succeed” mantra has been, for the most part, a reliable diminisher of dissent.
Christian evangelist Franklin Graham is urging Americans to pray for the nation’s current commander-in-chief to succeed. But some don’t care to take counsel from a nominal pastor who has called Islam “a religion of hatred,” and who said of Hinduism, “No elephant with 100 arms can do anything for me.” Others find his 2011 comments regarding Barack Obama (“The president’s problem is that he was born a Muslim”) troubling. Many Americans would, with good reason, choose to disregard the utterer of such pronouncements.
But perhaps those disdainful of Pastor Graham would more readily heed the words of America’s most recent ex-president, the very man they assail Graham and others of his ilk for defaming. On the day after the 2016 election Barack Obama met with president-elect Donald Trump and told him, “If you succeed, then the country succeeds.” Added defeated candidate Hillary Clinton: “Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and a chance to lead.”
So if high profile spokespersons on both the right and the left believe the success or failure of the country and its chief executive are intertwined, Americans should fervently root for Donald Trump’s presidency to be a triumphant one, right?
Well, no.
Having Mr. Trump’s vain, inarticulate, and fact-challenged “leadership” bear fruit would in the long term be an unmitigated disaster for America. His success would be a total repudiation of the basic values our nation and the vast majority of its citizens profess to espouse. Worse yet, it would tacitly encourage those who crave elective office for all the wrong reasons to employ the sorts of tactics that are anathema to what America was built on. Imagine a whole new generation of power-seekers, Democrat and Republican, eagerly embracing preening, pandering, and prevarication over courage, character, and commitment.
The current president has surrounded himself with a motley collection of obsequious bootlickers, filling cabinet posts with a blend of under-qualified incompetents (Betsy DeVos, Rick Perry, Ben Carson) and outright kleptocrats (Scott Pruitt, Ryan Zinke, Tom Price). This gives further credence to the idea that blind loyalty to one man, no matter how morally and/or mentally flawed, is far more important than knowledge, thoughtfulness, and experience.
The current president’s utter disdain for ethics, his factually inaccurate boasting, casual adultery, and unapologetic bullying are all repugnant, but no more so than his breaking our nation’s word by backing the United States out of at least two painstakingly-negotiated, multilateral international agreements.
A national consensus that America’s nominal leader is a success would confirm that grandstanding, insincerity, and spurious personal attacks on opponents in an effort to appeal to the lowest common denominator are far more politically effective than discussing and debating substantive issues. It would certify shamelessness as a valuable asset, not a character flaw.
Any favorable outcomes the current commander-in-chief takes credit for would further the already too-prevalent notion that elective office is a sure-fire way to gain or increase one’s personal wealth, that the rule of law doesn’t apply to the rich and powerful, and that keeping one’s word is for losers.
Seeing an economy that was already on the rebound when he inherited it from his predecessor continue to thrive is an attractive prospect in the short term, but in long run any and all perceived successes for this president would be catastrophic. Such a scenario would verify that trust and honor are merely quaint anachronisms, and no longer prerequisites for future leaders or policymakers.
Consigning character, ethics, and truthfulness to the scrapheap of American political history seems a steep price to pay for some temporary tax breaks and the possibility of a briefly nuke-free North Korea.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
