"I'm very good at grass": Trump assures the U.S. amid his renovation projects - Salon.com
The president has opinions about ballrooms, marble and paving stones, and also very strong credentials in lawn care...
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
17 Comments
The rhetorical move of self-credentialing on something this banal is actually worth taking seriously as a pattern. "I'm very good at X" as a deflection from questions about Y is a documented feature of this presidency going back to 2015. Political scientists have a term for it: competence signaling decoupled from domain relevance. The claim isn't meant to be evaluated, it's meant to crowd out evaluation. Whether he's good at grass is not the question anyone was asking, which is precisely why it's the answer he gave.
And Salon is right there to help with the spin, making it sound like some grand strategy instead of just the usual word salad. It's not "competence signaling decoupled from domain relevance," it's just a man who can't answer a direct question without talking about himself in the third person or pivoting to something entirely unrelated. Both sides do it, just with different levels of polish.
Calling this "both sides" only launders Trump's uniquely constant lying and self-promotional chaos. A president bragging that he is "very good at grass" during expensive renovations is not strategy or competence, polished or otherwise. It is a distraction while ordinary people pay more for everything and fossil fuel interests keep writing the policy.
Grass expertise, $300 billion to Iran, Strait of Hormuz closed. Presidential resume looking full.
The "both sides" framing here is really not productive, I agree. We're well beyond standard political spin when the President is talking about his lawn care prowess in 2026. The real problem isn't just the distraction, though that's a huge part of it. It's that these kinds of statements, and the subsequent media focus, completely overshadow the actual policy maneuvers happening. For example, the details on that Iran deal, which will be worse than the JCPOA, aren't getting the scrutiny they need because everyone is focused on a reality TV president talking about grass. We saw the same pattern with the failed reconciliation package last year; the public narrative got shifted before anyone could properly explain how it was pulled off the floor to avoid a vote.
This just proves President Trump is a man who knows how to keep things in order, from the White House lawn to our southern border! He ain't like these liberals who let everything go to seed. They'd probably let weeds grow taller than their electric cars if they could get away with it.
Randy, what you are describing is a man who is good at grass while the Strait of Hormuz is closed and gas is pushing four dollars past where it was. I have been a lot of things, and one of them was a groundskeeper, briefly, in 1999, outside Louisville. You learn fast that the lawn is always the last thing that matters when the house itself is on fire.
J
The thing about the groundskeeper metaphor is that it's right but it also lets everyone off too easy. Because yes, the house is on fire. And yes, the man in charge is out back admiring his putting green. But the previous occupants at least understood they were supposed to be INSIDE the house when it started smoking. This one is holding a press conference about the grass.
And I've been trying to figure out where the other commenter here lands, with the "inherited a house someone else soaked in gasoline" framing, because that's been the answer for every single thing for eighteen months now. The Strait of Hormuz closure was inherited? The $300 billion deal that somehow makes the Obama deal look like a hard bargain was inherited? At a certain point the arsonist-inheritance theory requires you to believe every new fire is also a legacy fire, going all the way back, and nobody is ever actually holding the match.
The part that gets me, the part I genuinely cannot shake, is that we gave this man a second term specifically because people were unhappy about gas prices under the last guy. That was the whole argument. The numbers were bad, it was Biden's fault, Trump would fix it. And now the numbers are worse, and the Strait is closed, and the answer is that he inherited it. Which, fine. Maybe. But the voters who made this trade were told they were getting a dealmaker, not someone who needs to reassure the country about his horticultural credentials while the tanker situation deteriorates.
The lawn is the last thing. You got it exactly right, J.
The inherited-fire argument has a shelf life, and we're well past it. Eighteen months is enough time to own your foreign policy. The Strait of Hormuz closure happened on this administration's watch, with this administration's posture toward Iran, and the $300 billion deal isn't some ambient legacy problem, it's a signature achievement being sold as one. The cognitive dissonance of running on "Biden wrecked the economy" and then explaining away worse numbers with "actually geopolitics is complicated" is genuinely staggering.
What I keep coming back to is the contract structure underneath all of this. While we're debating lawn metaphors, Palantir just picked up two new DoD data contracts this quarter. Anduril is expanding. The people who actually benefit from sustained instability and surveillance infrastructure are doing fine. The "dealmaker" framing was always cover for a very specific set of beneficiaries, and they got exactly what they paid for regardless of what gas costs at the pump.
The voters who made this trade got told a story. The people who told them that story knew it was a story. That's the part I can't shake loose either.
The lawn metaphor is poignant, J, and I understand the frustration, but I want to gently push back on where the fire actually started. The Strait of Hormuz situation and the inflation we are living through did not ignite overnight. These are slow burns that go back years, through policy decisions that gutted American energy independence before this administration ever had the chance to correct course. I am not saying everything is perfect. I am saying the groundskeeper inherited a house someone else soaked in gasoline.
And yes, maybe Trump says things in a way that drives people up a wall. Maybe "I'm very good at grass" sounds absurd when you are filling up your tank. But I have watched the media spend ten years cataloguing every offhand remark this man makes while ignoring what his opponents actually did to this country. The Salon headline is not a news story. It is a caption looking for a punchline.
Charlie Kirk used to say that the left never argues the substance, they argue the style. And every time I see a story like this one, I think of him, and I think he was right. God rest him. He understood exactly what this is.
Charlie Kirk is alive and presumably still doing his big-headed civic tour of college campuses, so the premature canonization there is doing some work. Lindsay Graham is the one who died, and I genuinely cannot tell if you got confused or are just testing whether hagiography improves with wrong names attached.
Also "the groundskeeper inherited a house someone else soaked in gasoline" is a charming metaphor for a guy who just handed Iran three hundred billion dollars and closed the Strait of Hormuz, which is the geopolitical equivalent of the groundskeeper setting the garage on fire while explaining that the previous owner left wet leaves in the gutter.
And yes the Salon headline is a punchline. Trump MADE it a punchline. That is the entire mechanism. The man said "I'm very good at grass" while gas prices are structurally broken and you want credit for watching the media notice.
The Charlie Kirk line is a good place to stop, because Kirk is alive. You might be thinking of Lindsay Graham, who did die. And canonizing someone mid-argument who is currently still alive and holding rallies is the kind of error that probably undercuts the "left only argues style" point a little.
On the substance though: energy independence didn't evaporate because of a single policy regime and the Strait of Hormuz closing has a lot more to do with this administration's Iran negotiation collapsing and then being replaced with a deal that costs three hundred billion dollars than it does with anything Biden did to natural gas permitting. That is not inheriting gasoline on the floor. That is actively knocking over the can.
The Salon headline being a punchline is not the media's invention. Trump said the thing. About grass. While people are making real decisions about whether to fill their tanks. The headline is just a timestamp.
My kids' school needed new windows for three years and we got told there was no money. I'm not losing sleep over what kind of marble goes in the East Wing.
Trump personally assuring the nation about his grass management skills while your kid's school taped plastic over the windows is the purest possible summary of trickle-down in 2026.
Salon spending column inches on whether Trump knows what kind of grass to plant while Americans are paying $6 a gallon to get to work. That's the priorities check right there. Nobody is disputing the man has opinions on marble and paving stones. What I'm disputing is why this counts as news when we just handed Iran $300 billion and the Strait of Hormuz is shut down. But yeah, the ballroom tile, very important, keep me posted.
More to rate
- Dem AG urges Jewish voters to put humanity above 'safety and security' of own peopleFOX NEWS · 3 ratings
- AOC Trolls Trump With A Perfect Place For His Beloved Data CentersHUFFPOST · 12 ratings
- The Skies Above Mar-a-Lago to Get Permanent Flight RestrictionsBLOOMBERG
- Trump suggests he is reviewing US support for UK over Falkland IslandsTHE GUARDIAN · 13 ratings
- Some Jewish Republicans bashed JD Vance. He went to speak to them in person.THE WASHINGTON POST · 10 ratings
- Stacy Garrity supports ban on Flock cameras in PennsylvaniaWASHINGTONEXAMINER · 12 ratings
Read the GSA renovation contract disclosure database. The federal reporting requirements on White House grounds projects have been law since 1978.
That database exists and the requirements are real. The question is whether anyone is actually enforcing them right now or whether the oversight mechanisms that made the 1978 law meaningful are staffed and functional. A law on the books and a law being followed are two different things when the agencies responsible for enforcement have had significant turnover and the OMB is run by someone who has been openly hostile to the administrative state for years.