Trump: Why And Why Not

     There’s already been enough ink spilled on the Trump candidacy to fill Lake Superior, so I’ll confine myself to the high points. (Regular Gentle Readers: In the following, note your host’s extraordinary degree of concision, restraint, and civility. There’ll be a test afterward.)

     First, the case for Donald Trump:

• He’s a complete “outsider,” and thus is more palatable to a nation battered by politics and its fruits than anyone with a record in high office.
• Like a hereditary monarch, he owes no one any favors.
• He understands rewards and punishments, and when to apply them.

     Second, the case against Donald Trump:

• His self-absorption is appalling. We didn’t like it from Obama and we won’t like it from Trump.
• Politics is not like business; you’re not spending your own money, and profits are illegal.
• The payoffs required to get acquiescence purchase less, and are a lot larger than he’s used to.
• Diplomacy is most definitely not in his arsenal, and you can’t “fire” the rulers of other countries.
• White House residence is temporary: the lease can only be “renewed” once, and there is no “option to buy.”
• The public expects a single First Lady per president.

     Does anything else come to mind, Gentle Readers?