Trump Is Losing It

Unfortunately for Biden, the former president benefits from something akin to the soft bigotry of low expectations.

By Jamelle Bouie

Feb. 13, 2024


https://static01.nyt.com/images/2024/02/13/multimedia/13bouie-pjtw/13bouie-pjtw-superJumbo.jpg
“We have to win in November, or we’re not going to have Pennsylvania. They’re going to change the name.”



It is unclear whether Donald Trump has forgotten the precise nature of NATO or whether he ever fully grasped it in the first place.

What is clear, however, is that Trump — who ostensibly spent four years as president of the United States — has little clue about what NATO is or what NATO does. And when he spoke on the subject at a rally in South Carolina over the weekend, what he said was less a cogent discussion of foreign policy than it was gibberish — the kind of outrageous nonsense that flows without interruption from an empty and unreflective mind.

“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump said, recalling an implausible conversation with an unnamed, presumably European head of state. “‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” Trump recounted responding. “‘No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.’”

The former president’s message was clear: If NATO members do not pay up, then he will leave them to the mercy of a continental aggressor who has already plunged one European country into death, destruction and devastation.

Except NATO isn’t a mafia protection racket. NATO, in case anyone needs to be reminded, is a mutual defense organization, formed by treaty in 1949 as tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union hardened into conflict. “The parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” states Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

According to the terms of an agreement reached last year, member states will work to spend at least 2 percent of national G.D.P. on military investment.

But let’s set this bit of fact-checking aside for a moment and look at the big picture.

It is not just that Trump is ignorant on this and other vital questions; it is that he is incoherent.

Consider his remarks at a recent gathering of the National Rifle Association in Harrisburg, Pa. “We have to win in November, or we’re not going to have Pennsylvania. They’ll change the name. They’re going to change the name of Pennsylvania,” Trump said.

Who, exactly, is going to change the name of Pennsylvania? And to what? I don’t know. I doubt Trump does either.

Or consider the time, last November, when Trump confused China and North Korea, telling an audience of supporters in Florida that “Kim Jong Un leads 1.4 billion people, and there is no doubt about who the boss is. And they want me to say he’s not an intelligent man.”

There was also the time that Trump mistook Nikki Haley, his former ambassador to the United Nations, for Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the House.

____________________________________________________________________

The issue here is one of proportion and consequence.
Biden may be unable to do the job at some point
in the future;Trump, it seems to me, already is.
____________________________________________________________________


“Nikki Haley, you know they, do you know they destroyed all of the information, all of the evidence, everything, deleted and destroyed all of it. All of it, because of lots of things like Nikki Haley is in charge of security. We offered her 10,000 people, soldiers, National Guard, whatever they want. They turned it down. They don’t want to talk about that. These are very dishonest people,” Trump said, repeating his false claim that Pelosi was responsible for the failure of Capitol security on Jan. 6.

If you would like, you can also try to make sense of the former president’s recent attempt to describe a missile defense system:

“I will build an Iron Dome over our country, a state-of-the-art missile defense shield made in the U.S.A.,” Trump said, before taking an unusual detour. “These are not muscle guys here, they’re muscle guys up here, right,” he continued, gesturing to his arms and his head to emphasize, I guess, that the people responsible for building such systems are capable and intelligent.

“And they calmly walk to us, and ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. They’ve only got 17 seconds to figure this whole thing out. Boom. OK. Missile launch. Whoosh. Boom,” he added.

I assume Trump is describing the pressure of actually manning a missile defense system. Even so, one would think that a former president — currently vying to be the next president — would at least try to be a little more articulate.

But this gets to one of the oddest things about this election cycle so far. There is no shortage of coverage of President Biden’s age, even if there’s no evidence that his age has been an obstacle to his ability to perform his duties. Indeed, it is plainly true that Biden has been an unusually successful president in areas, like legislative negotiations, that require skill and mental acuity.

Coverage of Biden’s age, in other words, has more to do with the vibes of an “elderly” president — he isn’t as outwardly vigorous and robust as we would like — than it does with any particular issue with his performance.

In contrast to the obsessive coverage of Biden’s age, there is comparatively little coverage of Trump’s obvious deficiencies in that department. If we are going to use public comments as the measure of mental fitness, then the former president is clearly at a disadvantage.

Unfortunately for Biden, Trump benefits from something akin to the soft bigotry of low expectations. Because no one expected Trump, in the 2016 election, to speak and behave like a normal candidate, he was held to a lower effective standard than his rivals in both parties. Because no one expected him, during his presidency, to be orderly and responsible, his endless scandals were framed as business as usual. And because no one now expects him to be a responsible political figure with a coherent vision for the country, it’s as if no one blinks an eye when he rants and raves on the campaign trail.

It’s not that there aren’t legitimate reasons to be concerned about Biden’s age. He is already the oldest person to serve in the Oval Office. The issue here is one of proportion and consequence. Biden may be unable to do the job at some point in the future; Trump, it seems to me, already is.

One of those is a lot more concerning than the other.
发布者 Olive8
1 年 前
评论
14
账户以发表评论
hielofrio
hielofrio 1 年 前
oldjacker67 : Few troops from other countries entered combat. The battles were mainly between Americans and British. The other countries were fighting when they were attacked
回答 原始评论
oldjacker67
oldjacker67 1 年 前
hielofrio : I remember quite a few European countries sending their soldiers to fight and die alongside American troops in the Middle East after 9/11. You can argue whether it was just or not but they did. 
回答 原始评论
hielofrio
hielofrio 1 年 前
NATO was created as a defensive alliance against the USSR after World War II. Years later the countries of the Soviet bloc created the Warsaw Pact. The fundamental thing about NATO is the North American protection of Europe, since Western European countries cannot confront the USSR even if they all ally. Therefore the US is the guarantor of security in Europe. If the US spends money on the defense of Europe, isn't it logical that countries also spend money on their defense? A minimum of 2% of each country's annual budget has been allocated.

Would US citizens accept that their soldiers die defending Europeans if the Europeans do not want to defend themselves? Europe is the continent from which all the great wars in the world have emerged, but it does not want deaths on its territory. They prefer that others die for them. That's called hypocrisy.

Trump is fed up with European hypocrisy, of which I am also fed up and I am European.

I could have escaped military service because I had asam, but I preferred to do it because I am not a hypocrite, like Biden and Trump were (and still are).
回答
oldjacker67
oldjacker67 1 年 前
This pretty much sums up the whole the election in three sentences. "The issue here is one of proportion and consequence. Biden may be unable to do the job at some point in the future; Trump, it seems to me, already is. One of those is a lot more concerning than the other." How did we get here? The wealthiest most powerful and productive nation on Earth and this is what we are trying to decide. Who between these two should be President? Yeah, I'll go with the one that can at least have a shot at performing his duties. 
回答
emigre69 1 年 前
Olive8 : Though unless these were all handwritten notes, there would have been endless copies on computers, somewhere. In some ways it is being discovered burning stuff which is the significant detail here - he knew that there was material which must not see the light of day.
回答 原始评论
SeaStories1983
SeaStories1983 1 年 前
Olive8 : Lotta burgers flying around to. I keep hoping for the one that will finally give him a fucking coronary. . . 
回答 原始评论
Olive8
Olive8 出版商 1 年 前
SeaStories1983 : On Jan. 6th, while the coupmander-'n'-creep watched his capitol ctime on t.v. for 7 hours , Cassidy Hutchenson went searching for Mark Meadows. She found him, alone in private, sitting next to  a fireplace busy feeding reams of pesky printed paper evidence to the flames. Wonder what he torched.
回答 原始评论
SeaStories1983
SeaStories1983 1 年 前
emigre69 : Oh to have been a fly on the wall. . . 
回答 原始评论
emigre69 1 年 前
SeaStories1983 : Although it turns out that some of them wrote notes away from Trump, which had to be produced in court !
回答 原始评论
SeaStories1983
SeaStories1983 1 年 前
Olive8 :  I remember one of the earlier Trump tell-all books from early in his administration. . . I think it was Michael Wolff's "Fire and Fury". . . in which he details White House counsel Don McGahn engaging with Trump during some consultation and Trump called him out for writing detailed notes. "Why do you write down everything?" or words to that effect. McGahn replied that it was because he was a lawyer and needed to keep track of details. And Trump tried to say he never had ANY lawyer write things down. . .
And, very likely, on that hangs many a tale. . . no wonder he keeps getting into the shit. He can't keep it all straight! And that just has to gall competent advisers. 
回答 原始评论
DrWhoWhatandWhere
Olive8 : Every good leader no a narcissist surrounds themselves with good and smart people..in business as well as politics 
回答 原始评论
emigre69 1 年 前
I think that Trump does not deal in well established facts, but in impressions - that NATO leaders ask him respectful questions (even though nothing about this one rings true), that NATO is about money and fees and being current, that he likes the idea of being harsh with other countries, that Europe is largely parasitic on the US.  Some of his listeners think the same way. That is not a question of age but of ignorance and political crassness. 
回答
Olive8
Olive8 出版商 1 年 前
DrWhoWhatandWhere : Biden surrounds himself with top people in their fields. Good, smart, honest people scare what's-his-name and make him angry.
回答 原始评论
DrWhoWhatandWhere
Who would you rather have their finger controlling the United States red nuclear button...maybe the older guy
回答