Who would do more damage as president, Donald Trump or Bo the dog?

Article II of the Constitution stipules that, to be eligible as President of the United States of America, a candidate must be a natural born citizen and at least 35 years of age. Donald Trump meets these requirements of course, but so - if we’re talking dog years - does Bo, the Obama family’s Portuguese Water Dog.

Barack Obama is not allowed to serve a third term as POTUS, but let us suppose that Bo, who hails from Boyd, Texas, could step up and take over from his master - would things be so bad? Would a Bo administration be worse than a Trump one?

Let’s assess his presidential merits:

Pros

- Is a good boy.

- Lacking opposable thumbs, would struggle to push the nuclear button, which most human beings would probably agree is never the answer to foreign attacks.

- Doesn’t have the cerebral capacity to comprehend climate change, which could be a con, but crucially would also be hard pushed to deny its existence.

- Would presumably appoint heads of federal commissions based on innately sunny personality and fondness to provide strokes, not the most rigorous of criteria but preferable to nepotism and valuing corporate track record over political.

- Is neutered; this could have saved the careers of countless politicians.

- International diplomacy. Rolling onto one’s back in the hope of receiving tummy pats is probably more likely to endear/calm another nation’s leader than confrontational talks, and is more direct/transparent than speeches to press and backchanneling.

- Has experience in The White House. Having lived there for eight years, Bo has been much closer to important conversations surrounding the future of America than Trump in the penthouse of his tower.

- Is hypoallergenic, thus less likely to irritate than Trump.

- Doesn’t pee indoors.

Cons

- Would only bark during press conferences? Though maybe that isn’t so different.

More: The difference between Barack Obama and Donald Trump in two photos