The Donald's Dangerous Brew

WASHINGTON -- Donald Trump's boastful ignorance in his interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt reminded me of a story that my late colleague David Broder told about former Sen. Bill Bradley.

The two were talking about whether Bradley would run for president. Bradley demurred. He wasn't ready to run, he told Broder, because he didn't feel that he had a good enough grip on the Soviet Union. The basketball star who famously practiced making baskets from every conceivable point on the court hadn't quite mastered the Soviet shot.

Your first thought on hearing that story, and comparing it to Trump's unapologetic know-nothing-ism, may be the same as mine: Those were the days. Oh, for a candidate disciplined enough to prepare for the toughest job on earth. Oh, for one modest enough to know his limitations -- or to recognize he has any.

Indeed, for all Chris Christie's shut-up-and-sit-down bluster, the New Jersey governor's explanation for not running in 2012 -- "I wasn't ready" to be president -- had a certain Bradleyesque charm.

Except -- and this was my second thought -- Bradley never came close to being president once he eventually decided, in 2000, to run. Perhaps he could have benefited from less tentativeness, and more Trumpian ego. Similarly, Christie's flagging 2016 prospects suggest that he might have been better off seizing a moment that looks far more favorable in retrospect.

My point here is not to excuse Trump's lack of knowledge, but to put the matter of presidential qualifications into perspective. The essential characteristics can be divided into three baskets: intellect, experience and temperament.

How you value the significance of each is an individual judgment. I think of them like Russian nesting dolls, each barely larger than the next, but growing in importance from intellect to temperament.

There is distinction between intellect and knowledge -- you can be a hugely smart person without knowing that General Soleimani is the head of the Iranian Quds Force -- but there is also a link between the two.

Someone with the intelligence necessary to be president should also have the intellectual curiosity to have educated himself on, say, the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah. The difference between the two groups does not matter to him yet, Trump told Hewitt, but "it will when it's appropriate."

There is a legitimate point underlying Trump's airy dismissiveness in the Hewitt interview -- that he'll simply hire the best if and when he lands the deal. You don't necessarily need, or even want, a president who's the smartest person in the room. You want the one with the judgment (experience) and confidence (temperament) to be comfortable when surrounded by the brightest experts.

...continued

swipe to next page