Op.tics

Noun

1. the way in which an event or course of action is perceived by the public.

Optics have always played a major role in politics. The way something is seen can be just as, if not more important, than what it’s trying to accomplish. Politicians work feverishly to make sure they are put in the best light, so it’s a little strange to see someone buck that trend.

President Trump is a person who has always done things his way. From The Art of a Deal to the Trump “brand’; it has always been his way or the highway. This week, Trump meet with the Russian ambassador one day after firing F.B.I. Director James Comey for either being mean to Hillary, or for continuing to look at connections between the Trump campaign and Russia (I report, you decide).

This is not about why Trump dumped Comey, but about the optics of meeting with the Russians the next day. Trump explained to NBC’s Lester Holt that he “never thought about the optics” of welcoming Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to the White House the day after he fired Comey.

“It was set up a while ago, and frankly, I could have waited but what difference does it make? I’m not looking for cosmetics. I’m looking to do a great job for the country,” said Trump.

Now some people will find that honesty refreshing. Maybe if we worried less about how the public might react to something and focus more on the job at hand, we would be better off.

Trump’s problem is that his so-called negative optics are as plentiful as opinions and are causing people to question his ability to lead and trustworthiness. Conflicting information, dismissing high level staffers like Mike Flynn and James Comey; and an ever changing narrative from his spokespersons erode the level of confidence and willingness (if you can find one democrat) to work with him.

During the campaign, the word unconventional was used ad nauseam to describe his campaign. I’m surprised we don’t hear that word more to describe his presidency.