You often hear from Maga Republicans that liberals think Trump voters are stupid. But we don’t talk nearly enough about the more important point: Donald Trump himself thinks his voters are stupid. Of course, no one despises their own followers as intensely as a populist, but even by those high historical standards, Trump truly sees his supporters as a vast crowd of fools. How else can you explain his recent, seemingly improvised claim that an AI image he posted—showing him as Jesus—was actually “me as a doctor”? No, it wasn’t. After it angered prominent figures in the Christian right, a key part of his base, he deleted it, complaining about these “idiots” and saying he “didn’t want anybody to be confused. People were confused.” Yeah, people are stupid.
Unfortunately, as you’ve likely seen, this image Trump shared on his Truth Social platform is still causing controversy. It shows Trump in Jesus-like robes, holding a glowing orb—maybe heavenly light or some radioactive material he forgot to tell Congress about—which he’s channeling into the forehead of a midwestern Lazarus. I’d love to know how the AI prompt could have been “show me Donald Trump as a doctor,” or how the AI might respond if corrected: “You’re right—I overstated that. I shouldn’t have implied the U.S. president is a benevolent deity who can raise the dead. To clarify, he’s a malignant narcissist and a tumor on the world. Thanks for catching that.”
Even if we took one of the world’s most notorious liars at his word, the Trump in this image would still be the most terrifying medical professional imaginable, finally surpassing Jeremy Irons in Dead Ringers. If you haven’t seen that ’80s body horror classic, Irons plays psychopathic twin gynecologists who have custom surgical tools made. Chilling. Yet, I’d still rather have those two perform my exam than wake up to find Donald Trump “making me better” under the adoring gaze of… let me look again… some U.S. service members, a daytime soap nurse, a heavenly host of war dead, and an F16 flyby. I’ve always wondered what really goes on at the famous Walter Reed medical center, which seems to have a team of doctors in white coats ready to swear Trump weighs less than Timothée Chalamet and has the arteries of a man 50 years younger. Maybe this bizarre image helps explain a few things.
Given his divine self-image, it’s no surprise Trump also took a shot at the pope while his reckless war in the Middle East continues to destabilize the world. The cleanup fell to the supposedly devout Catholic J.D. Vance, who seems to abandon any principle for convenience. Last night, he was pontificating that the pope should “stick to matters of morality.” In that case, the pope might have a few more pointed questions for this corrupt administration.
All in all, this should be a time of deep reflection for a certain group of media pundits I call the “Whisper-Its.” “Whisper it” is one of journalism’s silliest affectations—whisper what? You’re writing it in a newspaper. But you might have noticed it’s often used by self-appointed political sages who completely failed to grasp that Trump always leads—and can only lead—to chaos and dysfunction. And they still didn’t get it, even into his second term.But don’t just take my word for it; let’s see the “Whisper-It” trend in action. “Whisper it quietly,” suggested the Sun on the eve of his inauguration last year, “incoming president Donald Trump might actually do a good job.” “Whisper it,” advised the Telegraph last May, “but it’s just possible sanity is returning to US diplomacy.” “Whisper it quietly, peace in the Middle East?” the Spectator asked archly last October. “Whisper it,” the Telegraph whispered that same month, “but Trump could be in line for a Nobel Peace Prize.”
Please don’t feel the need to whisper it, but all of this was, and always has been, the most blatantly obvious nonsense. Yet there are endless examples, building from a surge around the inauguration to an absolute flood in the first 100 days of his presidency. And as noted here before, it was still happening just seven weeks ago, when Trump launched his “four-week” war on Iran, riding on Israel’s coattails.
What fuels these “Whisper-Its”? Is it naivety, blind hope, or a desire to serve up only the hottest takes? Or is it simply a staggering inability to see that an obviously terrible man will obviously do terrible things, over and over? Is it an inability to simply listen to Trump’s own words, to watch him pose a daily and indefensible threat to a more decent way of life, and conclude that he is clearly emotionally, intellectually, and morally bankrupt? Who knows, but let’s just say: they could not have been more wrong. Never feel the need to whisper it.
Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist.
Frequently Asked Questions
Frequently Asked Questions
Beginner Definition Questions
Q1 What does second coming mean in this context
A Its a metaphorical phrase often used in politics and media to describe a major political figures return to power or the spotlight after a defeat or hiatus Here it humorously compares Donald Trumps potential return to the presidency to a religious prophecy
Q2 Is this claiming Donald Trump is literally a religious figure
A No The statement is satirical and provocative using exaggerated comparison for rhetorical or humorous effect Its commenting on the fervent support he receives from some followers not making a literal theological claim
Q3 Why compare Trump to Jesus
A The comparison is intentionally hyperbolic to highlight the intense almost messianic devotion some of his supporters exhibit and to critique or satirize the nature of modern political movements
Benefits Perspective Questions
Q4 What are the perceived benefits or reasons supporters might prefer this second coming
A Supporters might cite his perceived strength on the economy immigration policies deregulation and his style as a political outsider who challenges established systems They may feel he better represents their interests and cultural values
Q5 How is he WAY better according to this viewpoint
A From this satirical perspective it suggests he is seen as a more tangible resultsoriented and combative figuresomeone who fights perceived enemies directly unlike traditional religious teachings of forgiveness and spiritual salvation
Common Problems Criticisms
Q6 Isnt this comparison offensive or blasphemous
A Many people especially those of Christian faith find the direct comparison to be highly offensive and disrespectful as it equates a political figure with the central figure of their religion
Q7 Whats the main problem with taking this statement seriously
A It conflates political leadership with spiritual salvation oversimplifies complex theological concepts and can deepen political divisions by framing support in absolute quasireligious terms
Q8 Doesnt this ignore Trumps controversies and legal issues
A Yes the hyperbolic statement intentionally overlooks realworld controversies polarizing policies and legal challenges presenting a onesided idealized version
Examples Context
