I’ve said before that, although this site will try to be balanced politically, Donald Trump poses difficulties in maintaining that balance. On a site whose very title indicates its commitment to constitutionalism, it is hard to defend Trump’s anti-constitutionalist behavior throughout his presidency. There are political defenses of Trump’s policies. To be perfectly honest, I generally prefer Republican policies, ie. deregulation, lower taxes, etc.. I also support the kinds of judges that Trump appointed while in office. I think yesterday’s SCOTUS decision against Texas’s ridiculous lawsuit illustrates well why these judges are good. Much to Trump’s apparent surprise, these judges were classified as “conservative” partially because they’re willing to follow where they think the law requires them to go. Unlike the ridiculous 2020 Republican party Convention which adopted no platform, they are not “conservative” merely because they support a Republican president. I also think that Trump’s foreign policy has been, thus far, underrated. His unexpected execution of Iran’s top military person, his facilitation of the peace deal between Israel and some of the Arab states, his dealings with North Korea, and even his more aggressive posture toward China were all signs of real success. have Republican friends who tried to convince me that the goodness of Trump’s policies, both domestic and foreign, outweighed the badness of his behavior and of his inattention to the constitutional dimensions of his office. But, ultimately, he failed at the most important role of the President: maintaining the health of the constitutional order over which he presides. Trump, as his sane supporters will admit, has failed at this crucial part of his job. Precisely because he’s a demagogue, he cannot fulfill that role. A demagogue’s authority comes through division rather than unity. If they don’t transition away from demagoguery and toward the unifying authority of the Presidency, a demagogic President cannot possibly fulfill their constitutional responsibility. The very first Federalist paper concentrates on how to control and prevent demagoguery. For the founders, that’s one of the crucial challenges for a democracy. The Constitution exists partially to prevent it. Trump is almost the definition of a demagogue. He has spent all of his presidency in what amounts to a state of war with blue America. He uses the language of “us”(Red America) vs. “them” (blue America). He emphasizes their divisions rather than their unity. He builds his support and power on those divisions. The rallies throughout his presidency allowed him to continue his demagoguery; he literally had to go outside the office to continue it. He’s already shown evidence, however, that he plans to join the office to his demagoguery. Holding the Republican Convention on the White House lawn and, post-election, making demagogic speeches from the presidential podium in the White House indicate that he would, in his second term, transition the demagoguery into the office itself. Given all of that, it’s hard to be a site dedicated to constitutionalism and defend someone who seems to want to destroy the norms that uphold our constitutional order. For instance, every President prior to Trump realized that it was better for the health of the regime that he concede to the winner. That norm is more important than any policy on which he might differ from the apparent winner. The unsettled state of the country right now is Trump’s responsibility by choosing not to concede. Trump doesn’t seem to recognize any good outside his own. Even if we were to admit that he’s concerned with the good of the people, that’s still a very particular people rather than the people as a whole. After all, blue America is as much a part of the American people as is red America. He refuses to concede the election because he will do anything to “win the war” for his side. He doesn’t recognize the good of the nation as a whole independent of his supporters.