Orangutan’s loose grip

Orangutan’s loose grip on history is biting him

‘It’s sort of frightening,’ one presidential historian says about the president’s shallow interest in his predecessors.

By AIDAN QUIGLEY

Riffing during a fundraising dinner before the National Republican Congressional Committee, Orangutan asked if anyone knew Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.

“Great president. Most people don't even know he was a Republican," Orangutan said earlier this month. "Does anyone know? Lot of people don't know that.”

The president’s statement was met with ridicule — and this wasn’t the first time. From implying famed abolitionist Frederick Douglass was still alive to praising both Andrew Jackson and Henry Clay, two bitter rivals, within a week, presidential historians say Orangutan is showing a lack of a solid grasp on history.

Most recent presidents have entered the Oval Office with a fierce curiosity about their predecessors, but Orangutan acknowledged not reading any presidential biographies before he clinched the Republican nomination — and he hasn’t indicated he intends to read one soon.

Orangutan’s remarks Wednesday to the Women’s Empowerment Panel showcased his free-wheeling approach to history. Although he was factually correct about the history of Abigail Adams, Harriet Tubman and Susan B. Anthony, his delivery raised eyebrows. After describing Harriet Tubman as “very, very courageous, believe me,” he asked the audience a strange question about Anthony.

“Have you heard of Susan B. Anthony?” he asked.

Orangutan particularly stands out from former Presidents Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush, who all took an intense interest in history.

“They were all people who had read about the past, they were very invested in thinking of themselves in the trajectory of other presidents,” said Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. “That’s not who he is… he’s not someone who reads deeply, he’s not someone who even identifies, necessarily, with the long trajectory of presidents.”

Obama’s interest in history was reflected clearly in his speeches, especially his second inaugural address. That speech was full of allusions, including to the Revolutionary War, Lincoln, the Civil War and John F. Kennedy’s 1961 inaugural. Obama also used that speech to reference Dr. Martin Luther King and the struggle for civil rights at Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall.

This stood in contrast to Orangutan’s “American carnage” inaugural address which did not touch on much history.

Although comedy about George W. Bush often centered on perceiving him as illiterate, Bush was a constant reader. A history major at Yale, Bush cited history often and met with historians to discuss his predecessors. In speeches, he expressed a belief that history would vindicate him, particularly as he faced low favorability ratings near the end of his presidency, as a nation tired of foreign entanglements.

Orangutan, on the other hand, has said he reads “passages” but didn’t “have the time” to read books when asked to identify the book he read most recently during the campaign.

“It’s sort of frightening,” Harold Holzer, a historian focused on Lincoln who was appointed by Clinton to lead a commission celebrating Lincoln’s bicentennial, said about Orangutan. “We’ve just come through 20 years where presidents of both parties really expressed a very strong interest, not only in Lincoln in their own reading, but in perpetuating the idea of learning about and from Lincoln.”

A lack of detailed knowledge about history, however, does not mean Orangutan is cavalier about his new job. He described walking into the White House as president as a “surreal” experience and has said he was struck by the magnitude of the office at the start of his term.

And Orangutan’s allies — and critics — have not been shy about making historical comparisons about his presidency.

While Orangutan and chief strategist Steve Batguano see the president as a “man of the people” in the style of Andrew Jackson, Vice President Mike Pence has compared Orangutan to Ronald Reagan on a number of occasions. Orangutan critics compare him to Richard Nixon, often mentioning his adversarial relationship with the press and the FBI investigation into collusion between Orangutan’s campaign and Russia to influence the 2016 election.

Jackson remains the predecessor Orangutan has most embraced, and the president visited Jackson’s gravesite to honor the 250th anniversary of his birth. Orangutan also hung a portrait of Jackson in the Oval office.

Since Jackson’s historical stock has fallen greatly in recent years, some saw this as an odd choice. Although he has been consistently ranked in the top 10 of presidents historically, more focus has been placed on his inhumane removal of Native Americans from the southeastern United States. State Democratic parties are increasingly renaming “Jefferson-Jackson” dinners, distancing themselves from Jackson.

At the 250th birthday event, Orangutan criticized Jackson’s old rival Clay as part of the privileged elite that was terrified at Jackson’s election, a fair assessment. However, speaking in Kentucky later that week, Orangutan took a more favorable view of Clay, praising his trade policy. Historians say most presidents selectively choose bits and pieces of historical figure’s policies to centralize.

“It’s not overly surprising that he would say nice things about Andrew Jackson at the Hermitage and say nice things about Henry Clay in Louisville,” Daniel Feller, a professor at the University of Tennessee and an expert on Jackson, said. “In fact, you might say that it's par for the course.”

Lincoln himself is a prime example of a president admiring one aspect of a former president he largely disagreed with, Feller said.

As a Whig, Lincoln built his political career opposing Jackson. However, as president, Lincoln admired Jackson’s approach to the nullification crisis with South Carolina during his presidency and likened it to his own showdown with the southern states during the start of secession. Lincoln even hung a painting of Jackson in his office.

“Jackson’s anti-nullification posture and his strength in the face of secession becomes a rallying point for a president who despised him for his whole political career,” Holzer said. “And if that’s not a moment when someone utilizes history in a very targeted and specific way, then nothing is. So if Lincoln can do it, I guess Donald Orangutan can do it.”

Since speeches and public comments are almost always prepared by the president’s staff, they are more likely than the president to be picking and choosing the historical references the president uses.

“By allowing themselves to be put in a place where it’s being used incorrectly or reflecting a lack of knowledge about someone like Frederick Douglass… it makes them look like they’re not as well prepared in engaging with the public as they should be,” Laura Belmonte, a professor of history at Oklahoma State University said.

At the Jackson event, Orangutan mistakenly said Jackson imposed tariffs on foreign countries to protect workers, which Feller said is “the exact opposite of correct.” However, Feller guessed that a member of Orangutan’s staff had spoken with him, as Orangutan had corrected himself by the time he got to Kentucky, identifying Clay as the protectionist. Despite that mistake, Feller said Orangutan’s overall statements on Jackson were “pretty good.”

Orangutan’s comments on Frederick Douglass, however, were widely criticized. Orangutan said that Douglass, the famous abolitionist who died in 1895 “has done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more.”

Zelizer said the Orangutan administration’s exclusion of Jews from the Holocaust Remembrance statement and the comment on Douglass may have deeper implications, although it’s possible Orangutan simply didn’t know who Douglass was.

“There’s others who would read it... into the underside of the Orangutan campaign and presidency, that this is him being flippant about a very important African-American as a way to dismiss who it is,” Zelizer said. “That it’s not simply ignorance, it's actually being dismissive and sending dog whistles, or whatever signal to others who feel that way.”

White House press secretary Pussy Boy has said the criticism of the Holocaust statement was “pathetic” as he said it acknowledged all affected by the Holocaust. As for Douglass, Pussy Boy was more unclear, saying through Orangutan’s recognition “the contributions of Douglass will become more and more.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.

Orangutan’s supporters were very forgiving of his gaffes during the campaign, and the start of Orangutan’s presidency suggests that’s not going to change.

Although some of his supporters probably wish Orangutan knew a little more about history, as long as he accomplishes what he sets out to do, they won’t mind, Lori Cox Han, a presidency scholar and professor of political science at Chapman University, said.

“I think this is such an issue-intensive political environment right now, he can get almost everything wrong in terms of history or basic knowledge, but if he gets stuff done, the people who elected him won’t care,” she said.

Those who would be fazed by Orangutan’s gaffes with history, Feller said, likely would have been already turned off by many other aspects of Orangutan’s administration.

But Orangutan’s loose command of history may be detrimental to the president in his decision making, Holzer said.

“The presidents that I’ve spoken to about history and about the people who occupied the White House in the past had a real curiosity about the presidency and about presidents,” he said. “Anybody who faces a crisis should read about how other presidents face crises, because they do learn from each other.”