In a column for Politico, former U.S. diplomat James Foley, who served as U.S. Ambassador to Haiti and Croatia, said his experience sizing up foreign leaders leads him to believe that any Republican considering running against Donald Trump for the 2024 presidential election has a better chance than they may believe.
According to Foley, the former president has considerable weaknesses that could easily be exploited and rivals of the former president should be proactive and go on the attack instead of hanging back and waiting to see if he announces or is waylaid by his legal problems.
Writing that GOP hopefuls seem to think the "theory of victory appears to hinge almost entirely on the possibility that Trump will be sidetracked or disqualified from running in 2024 or that primary voters will simply tire of his ceaseless chaos," he added, "This is plainly a strategy for losing."
Getting right to the point, he wrote, "The fact is, Donald Trump is beatable. I have seen his type around the world; he is a would-be autocrat who lacks the vision, discipline and basic competence to achieve anything of enduring significance — a piker compared to world historical demagogues of the recent past, or even our home-grown variety like Huey Long."
IN OTHER NEWS: Trump offered to give a lawyer a horse instead of paying $2 million in legal fees: new book
According to Foley, going after the former president requires a multi-pronged approach, that puts labeling Trump as a "loser" at the top of any of his rival's lists.
Writing, "no Trump myth is more important to demolish than his claim to have won the 2020 election," the former ambassador claims it is important to remind voters that Trump is a "stone-cold loser" and why should the next election be any different.
"Trump’s would-be rivals should brutally call him out for what he is (and what Trump hates most): a loser," he suggested. "A failure who put Joe Biden in the White House. A defeated president who, like Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush, should be unthinkable as his party’s standard-bearer for a third time in a row."
The next step, he insisted, is to drag up Trump's foreign policy bungling, with Foley writing, "The reality is that he frequently blundered in foreign affairs, as his first secretary of State so memorably noted. Unfortunately, however, the foreign policy arguments deployed by Republicans are largely based on the premise that America’s security and standing in the world were in essentially good hands when Trump was president."
READ MORE: Elise Stefanik butting heads with Kevin McCarthy in New Hampshire GOP primary: report
Noting that Russia's intentions to invade Ukraine were formed while Trump sat idly by, Foley claimed Trump's ties to Vladimir Putin should also be exploited.
"It is political malpractice for Trump’s Republican rivals to let him suggest he would have somehow prevented Putin’s aggression or rallied the NATO alliance in Ukraine’s defense. Trump’s entire public career has been characterized by obsequious admiration for Putin and Russia and antipathy for NATO and U.S. allies, along with a particular disdain for Ukraine," he wrote before warning, "A second Trump term would grant Putin the geopolitical ascendancy that has thus far eluded him on the battlefield."
Lastly, he suggested piercing Trump's claim that he is a "tough guy," adding that nothing could be further from reality,
"There are few things easier to ridicule than a pretend tough guy whose toughness consists almost entirely of bragging and bluster," he wrote. "Donald Trump is uniquely vulnerable in this regard. He was not tough on Russia, or the Taliban, or North Korea. He was not even tough when it mattered on Iran, allowing the mullahs to resume and accelerate their march to a nuclear arsenal without facing military retribution from the United States," adding that there is no shortage of "damning material" if a rival is willing to use it.
RELATED: 'That’s unfair': Trump complains that the FBI never raided Joe Biden’s house
He concluded, "Republican leaders with conservative credentials have the credibility to expose Trump as the threat to national security that he is. The truth is so compelling, in fact, that the ultimate prize could very well go to a truly tough-minded candidate who dares to make the case. What does he — or she — have to lose?"
You can read the whole piece here.
