Two Presidents: Dr. Teleprompter and Mr. Spontaneous

I remember the Oscar-winning 2001 movie A Beautiful Mind in which mathematics genius John Nash hits upon a life-changing revelation: in economic and conflict scenarios the best result does not come about with each party working solely in their own best interests, but rather with each party working both in their own best interests AND in those of the group as a whole.  This principle of duality, which Dr. Nash worked out with mathematical precision, eventually won him a Nobel Prize.  Yet how many of us practice it in our lives?  But today I'm looking up at the leadership of my country, and wonder how one elected by a particular constituency can remain loyal to them and their interests while at the same time administering to the interests of the country as a whole: in other words, duality practiced on a national level.  To this end I am examining the presidency of Donald Trump, now a little more than seven months old...

On some level I think Mr. Trump...as well as his predecessors...understands the principle of duality described above.  But instead of integrating the general national interests with those of his supportive voting base, he has apparently undergone a bizarre schism...much like Robert Louis Stevenson's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.  On one hand, "Dr. Teleprompter", with his prepared texts, delivers relatively reasonable and rational messages that tend to persuade and unify the entire country behind his policies.  But then he'll slip into a different personality: "Mr. Spontaneous", expressing himself through Twitter, rallies, and interviews, emotionally panders to "his" people and rips into anyone or any institution that he even remotely suspects opposes him...in other words, a thoroughly divisive persona...and in that mode he often contradicts his "Dr. Teleprompter" speeches, in spirit if not also in essence.  So I have to ask myself: Who's the President?

That's the question an old friend asked me when I pulled up at his Checkers drive-through window one evening way back in late November of 2000.  Although his intention was to elicit whether I thought Bush or Gore had won the recent controversial and then still-disputed election, I had a quick, smart-ass reply: "Why, Bill Clinton of course!"  Now I'm asking the same question to myself and, looking at the answer, I see nothing at all funny...