Looking at Donald Trump's bar-lowering inauguration as the 45th US president and its immediate aftermath, one could feel that he might have been unduly dignified by some labels. Prima facie such tags of him being an 'outsider, rebel or insurgent' to the system may resonate intellectually, but does he merit any of these when subjected to the reality checks of his own credentials? Â
Some saw the makings of a Trump doctrine in a few excerpts of his inauguration address. The following may have smacked of the doctrinaire to them: A) "January 20th 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again;" and B) "We are transferring power from Washington, DC and giving it back to you, the American people".
This populist rhetoric has a limited campaign-time shelf life. It expires with the new incumbent in position who, the people expect, will match his words with deeds. If he has fantasised agendas aimed to create a myth around him, then they are not inherently doable options. So, sooner or later, he will come to grief.
Seldom had an American president, expected to be leading the greatest democracy and the biggest economy of the world, abandoned his role with such self-serving policy statements as Donald appears to have done: "We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and Hire American."
Trump's abysmal portrayal of the US economy may remind of Ronald Regan's 1981 address in which he berated "economic affliction and idle industries". It's not just a bad, but dishonest analogy.
Reagan inherited an economy struggling with stagflation and an unemployment rate of 7.5 per cent. In contrast, under Obama administration, the economy added private sector jobs for 80 consecutive months with the unemployment rate standing at 4.7 per cent.
Trump fixated on rubbing the wrong side of populism, did not have the customary decency to thank his predecessor. But Obama had paid that courtesy to George Bush. Also was noted a lack of courteous reference to his electoral rival Hillary Clinton.
What is happening in the wake of the inauguration is a darn petty-minded quibbling. He has termed the journalists "among the most dishonest human beings on Earth". Why? Because they reported that less number of people attended his inauguration than they did during Obama's.
Not content with it, he dispatched his press secretary, Sean Spicer to the White House briefing room to claim a record attendance which was not borne out by an easy to check fact. The fabrication was sought to be passed off as a ridiculous alternative fact citing world-wide television audience!
Trump, who is known to have dubbed the CNN as Clinton News Agency, has shown himself being increasingly distrustful of the press. Moreover, by quibbling on such a matter of how many people had attended his inauguration, he is not being focused on the real issues on hand. He sets a tenor for  trivialities which is patently unpresidential. Besides, instead of building credibility with the media he is chipping it away.
Although he boasts that he has the best IQ Cabinet, most of its members are yet to take their places after confirmation by the Congress. In some cases, observers wonder whether these will go from the committee to the floor.
  The peaceful transfer of power is the hallmark of American democracy which the world witnesses every four years marveling at its continuity for more than 200 years. But the trapping around it notwithstanding, the accommodative goodwill in the system is being stripped away.
That apart, if one were to take into account the huge protest rallies from the inaugural day onwards, coupled with 'sister' demonstration marches in 60 countries against Donald Trump, one is led to wonder if indeed it has been a peaceful transfer of power, after all.
safarihi43@gmail.com
Â