I reached the same conclusion at the end of Part I, where the author compares Trump with the Mule. Either his understanding of Asimov's story was shockingly poo

I reached the same conclusion at the end of Part I, where the author compares Trump with the Mule. Either his understanding of Asimov's story was shockingly poor or he's shamelessly grasping at straws: The Mule is a truly exceptional mutant, someone like Marvel's X-men, a very remote possibility of nature that becomes probable only thanks to the huge numbers of the Empire's lifetime and population. This is about as close as science-minded Asimov will go to invoke a miracle in a plot. Trump, meanwhile, is disgustingly unremarkable, an incompetent small-time crook with a sad set of psychological defects. Had he not won the lottery in terms of his inheritance, you could find him vegetating in a trailer park in Arkansas. And had the GOP's bizarre infighting machinations left it with a single emerging credible candidate, Trump's ship would have sunk long before the primaries. What you quoted from the author makes it clear that his grasp of reality is as tenuous as Trump's.