That first diagram, used here many times before, is the flat learning curve. Satisfying his apparently irresistible impulse to shout from the metaphorical rooftops every thought that enters the strange realm known as his head has almost never worked out well for Trump. A President has an obligation to his office and his country to avoid public statements that can only harm his policy agenda, his political support and ability to lead. Oh, never mind: President Trump is going to keep doing it anyway, the equivalent of a less-than-swift child who keeps sticking his hand into a spinning fan to see if this time it will slice his fingers like the last six times.
The other diagram is the Cognitive Dissonance Scale. There is literally no possible benefit the President can gain from attacking the Pope, but guaranteed harm. Catholics who believe in the guy’s pipeline to God will lower their regard for Trump as a result of this outburst: God trumps Trump. Duh. Catholics who don’t pay attention to what the various socialist, anti-American Popes blurt out won’t change their opinion of the Vatican and its main resident, but may well lower their opinion of Trump because they realize what a stupid thing attacking the Pope is, particularly as his Trump’s party faces a crucial election and is involved in a war that the Axis wants him to lose.
Everyone else is presumably smart enough to understand that some old guy in Rome telling us how to run our country is the height of arrogance and getting out of his lane, but also that the President complaining about it activates the Streisand Effect.
To be fair, the Pope’s response to Trump’s rant was total and unvarnished hooey:
“I have no fear of the Trump administration, or speaking out loudly of the message of the Gospel, which is what I believe I am here to do.The things I say are not meant as attacks on anyone. I do not look at my role as being political, a politician. I don’t want to get into a debate with him. I don’t think that the message of the Gospel is meant to be abused in the way that some people are doing.”
Popes aren’t supposed to spout hooey.
When the Pope issues pointed condemnations of a nation’s policies or actions, and as a result sides with one political party or movement over another, that’s political, and the Pope knows it. Recent Popes have been promoting open borders and this Pope had clearly criticized U.S. immigration enforcement. Now he’s working to let Iran off the hook its own deadly policies and unethical actions placed it on. That’s also political. Ethics Alarms has often discussed the particularly infuriating device of people denying what they are doing while they are doing it (“I’m the last one to criticize, but..”), and this is what the Pope is engaged in. Bad Pope! It’s instant hypocrisy, and Popes aren’t supposed to be hypocritical either.
But Leo’s just a man far away in a funny hat whom a lot of people think should be able to tell us how to live. A President should pay no attention to whoever it is—Jack Kennedy had to promise to pay no attention to Popes to get the nomination for President. Why Trump can’t figure that out isn’t exactly a mystery—Trump can’t abide any criticism and feels he has to strike back at all critics—-but it’s still exasperating.
Ethics Alarms 
Another fine example of Donald Trump’s narcissistic, loose cannon, unethical mouth.
If he would just shut up!
The President should consider the words spoken by John F Kennedy during his race to become President in 1960.
https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/american-society-of-newspaper-editors-19600421
In this speech JFK affirmed the separation of church and state in the USA, where no Catholic prelate would tell a president how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell their parishioners how to vote.
“For voters are more than Catholics, Protestants or Jews. They make up their minds for many diverse reasons, good and bad. To submit the candidates to a religious test is unfair enough – to apply it to the voters themselves is divisive, degrading and wholly unwarranted.“
The implication is that the statements of any prelate, or any council of churches carry no more weight in politics that the opinions of your neighbor who engages you in a political conversation while trimming the hedge. This implies that the President should give no more due reference to statements spoken by a prelate or council of churches than to anyone else who posts his opinion on the social media. Congress and SCOTUS are the only parties with legal standing to address the President, and the President should limit his response to those who have legal standing, or the the press when he is allowing a press conference.
The Church should be aware of the limitations on political speech. Jesus said “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36) to Pontius Pilate. The nation states as we know today (and that includes the United States of America) are not faith communities, unlike Israel in the Old Testament; this implies that the standing of the Church to address a government is not comparable to the standing of an Old Testament prophet when addressing the King and the people of Israel.
Most statements on political matters (immigration, war, poverty) by church officials are existing political talking points carefully wrapped in theological language, with some Bible texts thrown in for good measure. These church officials are playing a cognitive dissonance game; the fact that a political statement is made by a prelate or theologian, appealing to the Scriptures or church doctrine, gives it authority.
By responding to church statements the President lends these statements more authority than warranted.
By responding to church statements the President lends these statements more authority than warranted.
Bingo. And attention.
Here is Cynical Publius take on papal interference with USA politics.
Yeah, that too.
I am adding a couple of more tweets, pointed to by Instapundit, to highlight what Pope Leo is doing. My editorial comment is that the Catholic Church should not act as if they are the Democrat Party in prayer.
And this tweet implies that the Catholic Church’s speaking out on USA immigration is corrupt due to a conflict of interest.
I am glad you did not use the punching down argument . Trumps comments may be used against him but Popes hold a great deal of influence over billions of people Catholic and Protestant alike.
I do appreciate the care you took in balancing your critique by holding both responsible for irresponsible comments. However, once the Pope weighed in on the issues I cannot fault the President for defending his policy in dealing with Iran.
He should have simply claimed the Popes remarks were aspirational but naive and when a roque nation has told the world it seeks the destruction of all another faiths and force those the leave alive to submit or die then someone needs to stand against those that are evil. He should end with for too long the Vatican has remained woefully silent on the behavior of Iran and its proxies who have brutalized its own citizens and facilitated or committed atrocities against non Muslims.
The President should leave messages like this to his surrogates, not publish these himself under his own name. This avoids the President to have direct accountability for the message if it fails. If a popular Catholic Senator or Congressmen criticized the Pope, it may have a more positive effect on popular opinion, at least among Catholics.
Surrogates are used to communicate unpopular, controversial, or high-risk opinions to distance the primary actor from backlash while enabling the message to reach the public. These surrogates—often political figures, influencers, or family members—provide, at least, the appearance of credibility, enthusiasm, or separation from the core, “unpopular” party. (Source: Google AI, Atlantic).
I understand the strategy but the question of the ethics of using a surrogate to make a statement you are unwilling to stand behind. Some of the major problems among our political class is the lack of transparency, purposely vague language, and plausible deniability. While I do think Trump’s words could have been better said I have to give him credit for standing up to a religious leader that pushes Lennon’s Imagine sentiment who also holds sway over millions of minds. The pope was silent on the murder if Iranians by its own government. He has no standing to pontificate on US foreign policy.
I read in the political dictionary below that in the olden days all campaigning for a President was handled by surrogates, as it was considered un-presidential to campaign for yourself.
https://politicaldictionary.com/words/surrogate/
Whatever it is, a President should not send out mocking tweets portraying himself as Jesus Christ; nobody will be convinced by such juvenile eruptions.