Lakhota
Diamond Member
WILL THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY NEED AN ASTERISK?
You have to look closely to see it. But it’s there. A five-pronged star cut right into the cowhide of one of the most significant baseballs in history. This is slugger Barry Bonds’ 756th home run ball in the Baseball Hall of Fame. Historic and record breaking, but forever tarnished by allegations of steroids use by Bonds, and now branded with perhaps the most powerful typographical character we have: the asterisk.
When a baseball player or other professional athlete is tied to performance-enhancing drugs, most sports fans agree that an asterisk (*) should be placed next to any noteworthy accomplishments or records they hold. Sometimes, as with the retraction of steroid-aided Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson’s 1988 Olympic gold medal, more drastic remedial measures are required.
But what do we do if an American president is found to have enhanced his electoral performance through improper means? There are no do-overs or special presidential elections authorized by the U.S. Constitution, no retractions. And as the evidence continues to mount that Russia intervened to help Donald Trump win the 2016 election (even if the ballots themselves were not tampered with), it’s time to start thinking about how we will denote for posterity the special circumstances underlying this presidency. If indeed the 2016 election is found to have been tainted, I propose we take a number of remedial measures to recognize this unprecedented fact — including placing the all-mighty asterisk next to the 45th president in the history books.
More: Why President Trump May Need an Asterisk in the History Books
I believe Trump has most certainly earned an asterisk (*) next to his name. Hopefully most presidential historians will agree. What do you think?