So let’s retire the word “King” from our political vocabulary and remember that our leaders serve at our pleasure, not at their own.. That’s not just patriotic—it’s the American way;
Sitting here in God’s Waiting Room, the word ‘King’ keeps bouncing off the walls.
It’s a word loaded with history, grandeur, and absolute authority. “King” conjures images of thrones, golden crowns, and realms ruled by a single, unchallenged will. For centuries, kings were the ultimate source of law, their power inherited or seized, their subjects living under their command.
The word itself is saturated with the notion of unaccountable control—an authority that flows from birthright rather than consent. Kings ruled because they were kings, and the people had little say in the matter.
So why, in the context of modern American politics, does “King” keep cropping up, especially in discussions about President Trump? Is it just metaphorical shorthand for strong leadership, or does it reveal a dangerous misunderstanding of what it means to be President of the United States? Or a deliberate attempt to destroy him personally?
Let’s start by unpacking the term. A king is a ruler, often for life, whose authority is inherited and frequently unchecked. Monarchs throughout history have wielded power with little regard for the opinions or rights of their subjects. Their word was law; opposition was treason. The crown set them apart, not just in status, but in their very relationship to the people they governed. There was no Board of Directors, no annual review, no threat of dismissal except through revolution.
Contrast that with the American presidency. Here, power does not descend from above, but rises from below—from the people. The President is not monarch, but employee. The office is held for a fixed term, with no guarantee of renewal, and is subject to the ongoing judgment of the electorate. The President does not inherit the role, but earns it through a process defined by the consent of the governed.
To call President Trump—or any American President—a “King” is both incorrect and misleading. The Constitution was written specifically to avoid kingship, to prevent the concentration of power in one person’s hands. Our system of checks and balances, separation of powers, and regular elections are all safeguards against monarchy.
President Trump was chosen by the people in an election. He was given the privilege—not the right—of leading the country for a set period. His actions are subject to scrutiny, his decisions are contested, and his tenure is not guaranteed. He cannot dissolve Congress, rewrite laws at will, or remain in office for life. He is not above the law but is bound by it, just like any other citizen.
Think of America as a company. In this analogy, the citizens are the owners—the shareholders who invest and expect results. The government officials, from the President down to local representatives, are employees. Their job is to manage the company's affairs and serve the interests of those who hired them.
Every four years, the owners hold a meeting: an election. They review their employees' performance and decide who stays and who goes. This is the ultimate act of accountability. If an official fails to serve the public well, the people—the Board of Directors—can dismiss them and hire someone new. Unlike a king, who answers to no one, a President answers to everyone.
Elections are America’s way of hiring and firing its leaders. They are a recurring reminder that no one in government holds permanent power. The President’s authority exists only with the people’s approval. This process is the antithesis of monarchy; it is democracy in action. The ballot box is more powerful than any crown.
President Trump is not a king. He is the country’s chief executive, hired by the people to do a job. He works for us, not the other way around. The moment we forget this; we risk losing sight of what makes America unique: the idea that power ultimately resides with the people. So let’s retire the word “King” from our political vocabulary and remember that our leaders serve at our pleasure, not at their own.. That’s not just patriotic—it’s the American way.
Read next: No Kings Rallies Were No Big Deal
Email Us | Reader Friendly | Comments
James R. Lightfoot, Lightfoot Strategies served in Congress six terms, starting in 1985 and retiring in 1997. As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal and General Government (TPS) of Appropriations, he had jurisdiction over 40% of Federal Law Enforcement (Customs, Secret Service, ATF, FLETC, and IRS enforcement).
