Opinion: America the abnormal: What now with President Trump?
Good morning. I’m Paul Thornton, The Times’ letters editor, and it is Saturday, Jan. 21, 2017, heretofore known as the day after the date which will live in infamy. Here’s a look back at the week in Opinion.
Donald Trump delivered an inaugural address that did nothing to calm the fears of people worried about having a president with authoritarian tendencies. His speech Friday — seemingly a potpourri of campaign punch lines on factories, foreign enemies and making America great again — was at once a discomfiting reminder that Trump will govern unreservedly from the populist far right and a pledge to all Americans that they will be heard. Characteristically, his promise to unite the country was made with rhetoric that does the opposite.
But the unease that boycotting lawmakers, protesters in the streets and millions of other Americans feel doesn’t change the fact Trump still became the 45th U.S. president Friday. His opponents — namely, the Democrats in Congress — now have a choice to make: Do they sit out the Trump presidency entirely, as the dissidents who feel dealing with the president is akin to “normalizing” him would have them do? Or do they work with him?
The Times’ editorial board — which leads off its editorial by saying “no one wanted Donald Trump to win the election less than we did — offers some advice:
Wholesale panic is not justified at the moment. Yes, the president-elect is dangerous — and we don’t yet know how dangerous — but the United States has outlasted multiple political and economic crises, from the burning of the White House to the Civil War to Richard Nixon. While it is reasonable to have grave concerns about the Trump presidency — and to fight him hard when necessary — remember also that the nation’s resiliency is built on the rule of law, respect for institutions, the peaceful transfer of power and acceptance of elections even when they bring to office people with whom one vehemently disagrees. Democracy can only survive if voters and their representatives have faith that, in the long run, the system will both endure and self-correct.
In recent years, that faith has been shaken. The country has fallen into a cycle of partisanship and obstinacy. The way the Republicans treated Obama was shameful and cynical and now, if the country is to prosper, it must somehow find its way back to rationality, cooperation and dialogue, even among political opponents. Washington cannot function if two polarized parties merely seek to obstruct each other’s aims.
For that reason alone, it would be wrong to proceed from the assumption that every proposal Trump makes is bad simply because it was Trump who proposed it — and that all of his policies should be resisted equally. The same goes for every Trump departure from the usual presidential practice. Of course a Trump presidency will not reflect the values of those who voted against him, but we have yet to learn how different it will be from a Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry or Jeb Bush presidency.
None of this requires caving in to Trump’s bad ideas or pulling punches when he is irrational. When he behaves recklessly or irresponsibly or unfairly, he must be opposed — by citizens and elected officials (and newspaper editorial boards), among others. We should be scathing in criticizing him when he lies or when he appoints people who would ignore the laws they’re sworn to uphold. He should be protested and excoriated if he tries to carry out the more outlandish of his campaign promises, if he persists in his ignorant denial of climate science or if he seeks to restrict civil liberties or backtrack on racial justice issues. Special attention must be paid to the needs of poor people, people of color and other vulnerable populations.
In the months ahead, it will be essential to try to separate Trump the carnival barker from Trump the president. It will be important not to confuse every irresponsible, unpresidential tweet with meaningful policy. Though Trump has promised all manner of wild-eyed things — unbreachable border walls, a secret plan to defeat Islamic State, “terrific” universal healthcare for less than we’re paying now — it is utterly unclear how much he will actually be able to achieve, or, conversely, how much damage he will actually be able to inflict.
To the extent that he moves in any directions that are reasonable, he deserves encouragement and cooperation. If he miraculously finds a cheaper alternative to Obamacare that provides high quality universal health insurance, as he has promised to do, we’ll support him. If he can create jobs and help more Americans climb out of poverty, count us in. When he’s wrong, he must be opposed.
It would be absurd to suggest at this late date that we’re coming to the Trump presidency with an open mind. We’re deeply dismayed, even frightened. But we’re still listening.
“President Trump is Populist Trump”: So says columnist Doyle McManus in reaction to the new president’s gloomy, foreboding inaugural address. The question before he took to the microphone Friday was whether Trump would strike a conciliatory note in his first speech as commander in chief. He didn’t, McManus says, and in so doing proved he meant what he said on the campaign trail. L.A. Times
Let’s take a moment to thank America’s newest ex-president. Contributing writer Melissa Batchelor Warnke praises Barack Obama for being a “deep thinker,” having a sense of humor, reading books voraciously, slow-jamming the news and calling himself a feminist. Although “true” progressives tend to slam Obama for his drone policy and other perceived betrayals of liberal ideology, Batchelor Warnke lauds him for “doing an absurdly difficult job made harder by an obstructionist Congress.” She concludes: “President Obama was not perfect, but he was extraordinary.” L.A. Times
From wise and thoughtful Obama to thin-skinned and mean-spirited Trump: Sandy Banks sums up the traumatic transition by contrasting Obama’s bias toward inclusiveness — his presidency saw the extension of marriage to all and healthcare nearly to all — to Trump’s dog-whistling that has emboldened bigots to fly Confederate flags or quarrel with anyone they consider insufficiently American. “Where Obama opened up a window, Trump installed a mirror,” Banks writes. “His campaign exposed a country at war with itself. The next four years will give us a chance to decide whether we can live with our reflection.” L.A. Times
Betsy DeVos embarrassed herself and should be rejected by the Senate. The Times’ editorial board doesn’t mince words on Trump’s nominee to be Education secretary, whose disastrous performance at her Senate confirmation hearing was highlighted by her stunning ignorance of federal law on serving students with disabilities and rote recitations of her preference for state and local oversight over just about everything. “She was so unprepared that she sounded like a schoolchild who hadn’t done her homework,” says the board. L.A. Times
Trump’s opponents can learn valuable lessons from the tea party. First, organize locally, write Gonzalo Martínez de Vedia, Jeremy Haile and Sarah Dohl. Second, play defense — in other words, stay united and don’t get bogged down in the details. Progressives should not abandon their positive vision for the future, but “for the next two years, at least, we can’t set the agenda, we can only respond to it.” L.A. Times
Reach me: paul.thornton@latimes.com
