In several of the South’s major college football strongholds — Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Florida, Mississippi, and others — there is little patience for an underperforming football coach. Lose a game, particularly a rivalry game, and the natives get restless. Lose a few, and you’d think the coach had committed a felony. Faster than you could organize a “Hang Mike Pence” rally on January 6, makeshift gallows seem to appear outside the coach’s home. These fans take their football very seriously. Winning is expected; losing is practically a capital offense.

What fascinates me is how that same passion for accountability seems to disappear when it comes to politics, particularly the president. These are voters who will go ballistic over a football team’s losing record but seem remarkably tolerant of political performance that falls well short of expectations.

They complain about rising food, medical, and gasoline costs, the consequences of tariffs on their businesses and pocketbooks, and the uncertainties of a poorly prepared war strategy. Yet, come November, many will dutifully return to the voting booth and support the very political leadership they have been complaining about.

Apparently, the standards for a football coach and a president are entirely different. One is expected to deliver results every Saturday or pack his bags. The other can keep losing and still enjoy the loyalty of the home crowd.

In football terms, the president and his party are sitting on an 0–11 record. And yet, nobody seems to be calling for a coaching change.

Interesting definition of accountability. Even more interesting voter judgment.