Last week, after the killing of police officers in Dallas, our various public officials gave statements of regret, condolence and encouragement. Donald Trump, who is a presumptive government official, also issued one.
It doesn’t read like he wrote it himself. On the other hand, both its points—the statement makes two—have errors in them.
In the first, he says this was “a coordinated, premeditated assault” on our police. The error is that the Police Chief of Dallas first announced that it seemed that it was, but later reported there was only a single shooter. Trump turned a belief into a fact.
In his second point he refers to “the senseless, tragic deaths of two people in Louisiana and Minnesota reminds us how much more needs to be done.” He doesn’t say, in spite of the video of both incidents, what needs to be done. Could be anything. Could be building a wall around African-Americans. Or the police.
This is a rather pitiful response in my opinion, and I think it speaks to the notion that Trump is good at winning but that’s all. Yet winning is important.
Fact is, Trump is a terrific negotiator. He threatens, cajoles, works things out, gets the best deal. He is, as he says, “all about winning.”
Trump’s weakness is in running things. He hires people to run things. And if he doesn’t like how they are running them, he fires them. Then tries somebody else.
You never see Trump greeting people at a casino. You never see him backslapping customers at a resort. You never see him creating a kitchen recipe for a new chef. He wins. He licks his chops in delight and he moves on, leaving the pieces to be assembled and made to work by others.
I submit that in many ways, Trump is like a dog chasing a squirrel. He loves chasing it. And he loves catching it. But then when he catches it, he doesn’t know what to do with it.
And this leads me to a suggestion. The other day, reporters, noticing Trump’s enthusiasm for winning and his lack of any good ideas beyond that, asked if he were to win the Presidency, would he consider resigning. His response was interesting. He said he wouldn’t rule out that possibility.
I think that if Trump should win, having won he should hire somebody to run the country. Let this person he hires be the President. Trump would be Chairman.
In many democracies, the office of the Presidency is a ceremonial post. Also elected is a Prime Minister. It is the Prime Minister who runs the country. But the President has the authority to fire the Prime Minister under certain circumstances and call for new elections.
Thus it would be that in the present instance in Dallas it would be the job of the Trump-appointed President to offer condolences and an intelligent explanation of what happened and how to prevent it in the future. Chairman Trump could smile benevolently at what the President has done.
For a long time now, I’ve thought that Trump, even if he didn’t win, ought to be given the title of National Public Advocate, the person who at newspapers and other media outlets gets to tell the people running things what they are doing wrong.
But if he wins the Presidency, I think he should kick himself up to Chairman and hire somebody else as President.
Thus, if the time comes when he wants to press the button to nuke a country he’s mad at and heads for the button, he’ll get waylaid by the President who will say “Stop, that’s my job, and I’ll take care of it.” No nuke will be fired. And Trump will say, “What do you think about that guy, standing up to me? What a fella.”
Have him choose somebody with the temperament to be President. Romney comes to mind, or Kasich or Jeb. Give Trump the right to fire him. He would love it, we’d all breathe easier, and overseas leaders would, too.