What the columnists said

Trump’s attack on African-American athletes “underscores the vital role of racist grievance” in his core message, said Jamelle Bouie in Slate .com. When he called the players ungrateful for “the privilege of making millions of dollars,” he was reviving the Jim Crow–era slur “uppity.” And he pointedly defined the two sides of this debate as “us” and “them,” turning a black player protest against police mistreatment into an assault on “America itself.”

Right or wrong, this was a “classic example” of Trump’s “gutlevel political savvy,” said Rich Lowry in NationalReview.com. He took a “commonly held sentiment”—that disrespecting the anthem is wrong—but stated it in a way guaranteed to “generate outrage among his critics,” and thus fire up his supporters. “This kind of thing is why he’s president.” Sorry, but fellow conservatives cheering this as a “win” for Trump are “missing the forest for the trees,” said David French, also in NationalReview.com. This is the president of the United States demanding that a private company fire its employees because of “free speech he doesn’t like.” That’s a dangerous threat to the First Amendment, and it’s why a tiny protest turned into a leaguewide show of solidarity.

Like it or not, Trump is “doing exactly what he was elected to do,” said David Brooks in The New York Times. He was elected to “shred the dominant culture,” defy the elites, and give voice to the resentments of the white working class, who feel “invisible and disrespected.” His incitements, including the attack on black athletes, have made America as culturally and racially divided as it was in the late 1960s. By the time Trump is done, “a new social fabric will have to be woven. That’s the work of the next 20 years.”