Let’s be fair and try to avoid partisan perspectives (Democrats will hate Trump, Republicans will hate Obama). Let’s also admit that with only 10 months in office, it’s difficult to accurately assess the Trump Administration’s performance b/c they’ve got 3 more years to go in this term. Things can get better or they can get worse. Given those caveats…
First, it’s honest to say that the Trump Administration has accomplished almost nothing to date. All of the things that some Republicans might point to (judges appointed, executive orders, appointments to particular agencies) are all things that any President can do. But in this case, the Republicans haven’t been able to generate any level of agreement even within their own party on any issue that is relatively important to the country or they campaigned on. They have a majority in the House and Senate plus a GOP President. There are almost no policies that have been held up due to filibuster (it doesn’t apply to judges anymore and the GOP made an exception to the filibuster rule for the SC). So you can’t blame Democratic opposition for the failure to get anything done. Generally speaking, the best opportunity for a new President to get stuff passed is in their first year….they’re riding a wave of success with their win, they’re new to office (and the public often likes a change from the past—fresh ways and all that). But there is no major legislation that the GOP has passed. So in terms of accomplishments, any honest Republican would have to admit that they expect far more results than what they’ve seen so far.
Second, if we evaluate on the basis of process and behavior, NO…the Bush and Obama administrations weren’t close to the Trump Administration in terms of how they acted, behavior, process, decision-making, etc.
There are always differences: Bush liked his security briefing to be oral and by powerpoint, Obama preferred it to be in writing that he’d review ahead of time then meet with a briefer and ask questions. But both Presidents viewed their PDB as sacred, very important and they took this seriously. Not so with President Trump.
Both Bush and Obama did a lot of studying and reading, a lot of in-depth review before making policy or making a decision. Both were generally regarded as pretty decisive on most issues. President Trump has been called a “moron” and an “idiot” by his senior people and having the attention span of a “kindergartener.” And before you call him decisive, look at how he’s reversed himself on issues like torture, the Iran agreement, healthcare, infrastructure, involvement in wars overseas—nearly 180° reversal from what he campaigned on. President Trump often switches his opinion wildly based on who he talked to last or what he saw on cable TV. The point I’m making here is that you can have different ways of making a decision but ultimately, Bush and Obama brought in advisors and experts, listened to them and had a “process” for making a big decision. That doesn’t seem to be the case in the Trump Administration. How things get decided seems to change with the wind.
Both Bush and Obama had a “thick skin” and refused to lash out at a lot of criticism (whether it was fair or not). For instance, I think it must have been very tough for Bush to have Cindy Sheehan camping out next to his ranch. And it’s ignorant to argue that many of the attacks on Obama (many led by Trump) didn’t have racist elements. Yet both tried very hard to be unifying forces. Listen to Obama’s speech in Selma about a “more perfect Union”…you have to be a very partisan ideologue not to be moved by that. I think Bush’s speech after 9–11 where he talked about how people couldn’t lash out at someone wearing a head covering, that people who attended mosques were just as American as those who attended a church, that was a strong statement by him as a President and very powerfully made. President Trump has gone in a very different direction. Everyone who works for him is quick to admit that his philosophy is to attack those who attack him, he’s said that he believes “if you hit me I’ll hit you back 10 times harder.” Look at his comments after Charlottesville (and how he keeps going back to those and insisting he was right). This is not a President who seeks to unify, who shrugs off criticism in order to try and build a consensus.
To work in the White House requires a willingness to sacrifice your family (there is no such thing as an 8–9–10 hour day, you routinely do 14–16 hour days all the time), you face continual criticism (even from your own party). So WH staff tend to be very protective of their president and big fans. This is in-part b/c if you don’t worship and really admire the President you serve, it’s hard to do the job with all of the hours, pressure, and criticism that comes with it. That was true with both Bush and Obama. It’s not true of President Trump where his staff are excessive leakers (and as I pointed out above, say very derogatory things about him to the press). In short, the current WH staff is far less protective of the President than under Bush or Obama, is much quicker to leak, much quicker to throw up their hands and go “who knows?” or “nothing I can do” when President Trump says or does something that is hard to defend.
In short, if you haven’t followed politics in the past or are relatively young and are wondering “Is Trump getting all this criticism b/c all Presidents get criticized for this or is he just really that extreme?”…he really is that extreme. This isn’t just a case of a non-politician bring a new approach. This is about a guy who doesn’t do preparation, doesn’t have a consistent process for making decisions, is quick to anger, seems to lack priorities, and makes everything be about him. So far, that has been a very big difference from how any other modern President (not just Obama or Bush) has operated. A range of members of his own party have specifically criticized him for his lack of preparation, failure to understand an issue, flip-flopping, quickness to anger, and no real values.
No comments:
Post a Comment