It's not only about reputation. Trump has been so obvious in his doing that the western world has started to define a new world order without the US in its center.
And should any "new world order" have the US in its center now?
We've paid for the entire world order outside the Soviet Union/Russia and China for decades. Time to present a bill, close the relationships (e.g., NATO, UN) and put our money and resources to better use for us in the USA.
> And should any "new world order" have the US in its center now?
Before Trump, the US was the best option by far. With Trump this needs to change obviously as the US might become an autocratic country similar to Russia soon.
> put our money and resources to better use for us in the USA.
I find it weird that people think that in a globalized world, the world order that evolved around the US was sustained out of altruism.
You don't want to influence what happens in the strait of hormuz? You won't hear complains from Iran. You really think all that hassle about the strait was done out of altruism? Venezuela as well?
Great Britain was once a global super power and now, well today they concentrate much more on themselves, so to say. You can concentrate on yourself, but others will keep playing the global power game and you won't get the better end of deals anymore.
I hope the power/wealth redistribution ends up helping Europe to a significant degree and not China.
Mr Vance's thoughts are more about the current administration that he is a part of, than the Nixon administration. His desire is to not be held to the level of accountability that president Nixon was. Mr Vance's claim that they do Watergate level things twice daily (1) may be true, but it is IMHO not positive and should not be a boast. Accountability is good.
Andrew Jackson was around 150+ years ago. Nixon was fairly competent diplomatically even if he was horrible domestically. Trump is a whole different breed that seems to switch his actions based on whim and who he spoke with last.