In many ways, Donald Trump's performance during Wednesday night's presidential debate was standard stuff: the blizzard of lies, the incoherence, the thin skin and concomitant angry interruptions and asides. But for all that Trump managed a new low for himself and for the political system when he pointedly refused to accept the results of the election.
This great republic has endured and flourished for well over two centuries because the leaders who competed for its highest office were, to a man, big enough to accept the judgment of the voters. This has been true in close elections and in landslides. It's ultimately the grease that allows the gears of our democracy to function.
And make no mistake: The loser of the 2016 presidential election is also going to be a man, even if on Wednesday Trump demonstrated once again and conclusively that he is not one big enough to stand for the office, let alone to win it.
Will Trump abide by the election results he was asked, directly, repeatedly? "I'll look at it at the time," he said. And, as if to assert some sort of final control over a process that has long slipped from his grasping, groping, stubby little hands, he added, "I will tell you at the time. I will keep you in suspense."
Suspense? That's something that has been drained out of this election. His political standing has utterly collapsed in the last month (and if you think he's reached bottom, buckle up). We are witnessing the last resort of the narcissist incapable of admitting error, let alone defeat: Blame someone else; blame something else; deranged indignity in the spotlight is preferable to the quiet humiliation of being out of it entirely.
At one level, Trump severely overestimates the level of suspense in which he can keep the rest of us. Despite what he seems to think, he's not the star of this particular reality show; he's a contestant. And when he's – to borrow from his oeuvre – fired in a little less than three weeks, he'll get this parting moment with the camera, but he won't be able to dictate the course of the rest of the show. Our political system doesn't need Trump's say-so to function. He can kick and scream and cry foul but he'll go from star to sideshow to the guy at the White House gate arguing with the Secret Service that he's the president and should be admitted to the White House at once.
At another level, however, his selfish, grandiose obstinacy is dangerous. It's dangerous because of the arc of his political career: He rose to prominence questioning the legitimacy of the first black president and now threatens to flame out questioning that of the first woman to hold the office. Over that time he's tapped into a sense of unease felt by a nontrivial part of the population and, displaying the very worst kind of leadership, he's nurtured that insecurity as a sort of civic spiritual poison, normalizing and encouraging anger, hatred and a self-fulfilling belief in the corrosion of our system. A recent poll found that 41 percent of voters think that Trump could have the election "stolen" from him. (Note to Trump: If you tell your supporters often enough that the system is rigged, they might believe you and not bother to show up, making the prophecy self-fulfilling.)
And this would only be the latest unthinkable realized, just the most recent political norm of behavior swept aside. There was a time when filibusters were rarely used; the debt ceiling was not always weaponized; when politics stopped at the water's edge; hell, I'm old enough to remember when there wasn't any question about whether the Senate would consider a Supreme Court nomination (not to mention other federal judicial vacancies).
And now a political dilettante clown is, god help us, the Republican Party nominee. He's at the pinnacle of the political system, laying the groundwork to call into question that most basic aspect of our national covenant – the governed granting their collective consent.
Why? Because his feelings are hurt – the governed won't consent to Trump rule. And the Oval Office isn't something that you can just grab because you're famous. (Note to Trump: Fame doesn't actually grant you the right to grab some of the other things you seem to think you can either.)
Will Trump follow through? Will he really, deliberately try to take down the political system because voters scorned him?
Who knows. Trump's talk is often bigger than his game – see the threats that emanated from his camp to sue news outlets for reporting on allegations that he'd groped women. He's unlikely to actually do anything in terms of contesting the results. At the same time, he may well moan, mewl and monetize – cry foul all the way onto his own Trump media network, which will out-fox Fox News in terms of zeroing in on and cultivating the fringe right.
But Trump does not operate in a void. He leads and represents the Republican Party, but it's not an organization composed of drones or Trump employees. They get a say as well – this week and after Election Day. "I think people will line up to condemn that one comment," former George W. Bush aide Nicole Wallace said on MSNBC after the debate. "You're going to see a whole raft of Republicans saying you have to accept [the] results," veteran GOP lawyer Ben Ginsberg said later on the same network.
She's right. Some Trump-critic Republicans (like the estimable Wallace) were quick out of the gate with condemnations: This is "beyond the pale," Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake tweeted, for example.
But it's not just Trump critics. Here's supporter Laura Ingraham, the conservative commentator:
He should have said he would accept the results of the election. There is no other option unless we're in a recount again.
— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) October 20, 2016
Once again, Trump is presenting the GOP with a test of character and mettle. Starting Thursday and running right through Trump's final "suspenseful" announcements, GOP leaders will be asked whether the American political system remains legitimate. They can fall in line behind Trump, they can stand up to him or they can dance the two-step they've practiced repeatedly over the last few months: denounce but don't renounce.
Donald Trump is well on course to being not simply a loser and historic loser but a historically sore loser. He will fail, he will flail and eventually his moment too shall pass. The question is how much damage he can do on his unwilling way out.
Robert Schlesinger is managing editor for opinion at U.S. News & World Report. He is the author of "White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters." Follow him on Twitter or reach him at rschlesinger@usnews.com.
Recommended Articles
Editorial Cartoons on Hillary Clinton
June 16, 2014
Editorial Cartoons on Donald Trump
May 31, 2012
Daily Cartoons: October 20, 2016
Oct. 19, 2016
Lawless Entanglement in Yemen
Oct. 19, 2016
U.S. military intervention in Yemen is unconstitutional and very unwise.
No Free Markets in Finance
Oct. 19, 2016
It's not the government's job to prevent the failure of financial firms like MetLife.
Ubiquitous, Implicit Bias
Oct. 19, 2016
Even the classroom isn't immune from the effects of implicit bias.
Conservatives No More
Oct. 19, 2016
The Republican Party's newfound admiration for Russia means it definitively isn't conservative.
Jailing the Poor, Releasing the Rich
Oct. 19, 2016
Sixty percent of jail inmates are there simply because they're too poor to afford bail.
Get the Hospital Rankings Recipe Right
Oct. 19, 2016
Instead of cobbling together imperfect data, let's create an absolute hospital quality measure.
A Roadmap for Better Teacher Prep
Oct. 19, 2016
New federal guidelines aim to hold teacher prep programs accountable.