Opinion | Trump Is Running Again. The Critics Pounce. – The New York Times
To the Editor:
Re “Declaring Run, Trump Ignores Party Setbacks” (front page, Nov. 16):
As Donald Trump announces another run for the presidency, the country, the Republican Party and the media would do well to heed the old saying “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”
In his successful 2016 run for the presidency, everyone underestimated him and unwittingly became his accomplice. The country was conned, the G.O.P. was caught flat-footed, and the media in its lust for high ratings and increased readership gave him a plethora of free publicity because, after all, the man’s a clown. What could possibly go wrong?
Your story states that Mr. Trump’s “unusually early announcement was motivated in part by a calculation that a formal candidacy may help shield him from multiple investigations” regarding his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. I agree with everything in that sentence except the words “in part.”
He’s certainly not running again to help the country. When did he ever put the country ahead of his ego and his personal needs? See the pandemic. He’s not running again to help his party. See what his endorsements did for the G.O.P. in this year’s midterms.
For their part, the Republicans, some of them at least, are finally speaking out against Mr. Trump and his candidacy. But not in patriotic response to what he did to the country in richly earning two impeachments and causing the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Heavens, no. It’s because of their own aspirations. They smell political blood in the water.
Don’t let Donald Trump fool us twice. Or shame on us.
Greg Joseph
Sun City, Ariz.
The writer is a retired journalist and television critic.
To the Editor:
As a Republican, I am concerned with the direction of my party after the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection. Our underwhelming showing during the midterm elections felt like the perfect time to abandon the chaos surrounding Donald Trump. But watching the former president’s presidential campaign announcement, I became worried that, for the third time, we would fall prey to his deception and divisiveness.
Instead of trying to be a unifier, the former president has criticized prominent Republican officials in hopes of tamping down any opposition brewing to his new campaign. Once again, the former president has placed himself above the interests of his party and the American voters.
But for all the chatter that the Republican Party is ready to move on from Mr. Trump, the former president is still polling above his likely competition. And if Republican voters nominate him for a third time to be president, I fear that our party will see some dark days in the future.
Kiran Bhatia
Brookline, Mass.
To the Editor:
Please do us all a favor by limiting your coverage of Donald Trump. He thrives on attention. He is totally unfit for office, and we are tired of reading about him.
Sally McMillen
Davidson, N.C.
The writer is emerita professor of history at Davidson College.
To the Editor:
Re “A Fractured G.O.P. Seeks New Direction Amid Power Struggle” (news article, Nov. 12):
Divisions within the Republican Party raise several questions. If Ron DeSantis prevails in what would likely be a bruising contest for the nomination in 2024, what can we expect from Donald Trump’s supporters? The answer may depend on whether Republicans then resemble a traditional political party, or continue to resemble a cult.
Will those who supported Mr. Trump be willing to fall in line and vote for a nominee who is not the leader of their cult? And if many do not, what would be the prospects for a Republican victory?
John Becker
Edison, N.J.
To the Editor:
I predict that if Ron DeSantis is the Republican Party’s presidential nominee in 2024, Donald Trump will not bow out gracefully, given his contempt for Mr. DeSantis.
Rather than sit on the sidelines like a loser, he’ll spitefully run as a third-party candidate, demonstrating once again his power by ruining any hope that Mr. DeSantis and the Republicans have of recapturing the presidency.
John Scanlan
Wethersfield, Conn.
To the Editor:
With all their pent-up grievance anger, MAGA Republicans are hellbent on starting a civil war. But rather than being between left and right, it looks as if this civil war is going to be within the Republican Party. Stay tuned. This stands to be a doozy!
To the Editor:
Re “Abortion Swayed Voters More Than Was Predicted” (news article, Nov. 11):
All voters enter the voting box alone. That means women enter it alone. There, women vote their real needs — their needs for autonomy, privacy, respect. Just like men.
No pollster is listening, making a little mark in a box for them. Likewise, no partner hovers in the background. No political group is chanting, impassioning, judging.
There’s no whisper but the woman’s own intelligence. The woman alone makes her mark. And what she has said to everyone else is: Trust me. I trust myself. I make good decisions. I am your mother, your sister, your daughter, your partner.
Respect women. You are hearing their voice — finally.
Jocelyn Ellis
Seattle
To the Editor:
Re “Not Trump’s Night: A Red Wave That Wasn’t” (letters, Nov. 10):
Donald Trump influenced the outcome of the midterm elections in another way, besides those cited in the letters. By nominating extremely conservative, tone-deaf, close-minded judges to the Supreme Court, he reminded the electorate that citizens’ votes are their voice.
The defeat of Roe awakened many citizens to their power in our precious democracy, thereby making the so-called red wave a mere ripple. Hopefully memories are long and recognition of the importance of a single vote will carry over to future elections, even when rights aren’t threatened.
Maureen Prindiville
Lincoln, Calif.
Whiz Kids Who Succeed, and Those Who Don’t
To the Editor:
Re “The Folly of Counting on the Tech Whiz Kid,” by Margaret O’Mara (Opinion guest essay, Nov. 16), about Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of the cryptocurrency exchange FTX:
The young people Ms. O’Mara mentions who succeeded (like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates) developed real, world-changing products. The two who failed (Elizabeth Holmes and Mr. Bankman-Fried) were selling a fraudulent product in one case and a product with no underlying value in the second.
These projects would have failed no matter who was behind them. Mature adult investors should know better.
Desmond G. Sheridan
Greensboro, N.C.
Migrants Fleeing for Their Lives
To the Editor:
“Climbing the ‘Hill of Death’ Without Her Mother” (front page, Nov. 12), about migrants fleeing for their lives along a 70-mile hellish jungle pass in Panama, reminds us that the current refugee crisis is not about “open borders,” as the Republicans have been allowed to frame the debate.
A more reality-based national conversation should be about the existential crisis of the increasing number of societies across the planet that can no longer sustain human life.
Bob Salzman
New York