Rauch on Trump and "The Constitution of Knowledge"

I think I disagree with a lot of this, but I'll need to read it more carefully.
   My own view is that Trump raises no special epistemic or otherwise philosophical questions. He's just an ordinary lying, bullshitting politician, different in degree but not in kind as compared to others. He says more false things--he's turned that up to 11. And that's very, very bad.
   But it's the left, not the right, that raises philosophical problems. Much of the academic left has abandoned the ideas/ideals of truth, knowledge, and objectivity. It explicitly rejects them as something akin to a matter of principle. The right might refuse to accept scientific conclusions it doesn't like; but much of the intellectual left rejects the very idea of science as a method and an institution for discovering truth. (Also, it tends to colonize sciences and bend them to its purposes...I don't know whether that should be classified as an in-principle, philosophical problem or not.)
   Of course differences in degree are sometimes more dangerous than differences in kind. Leftist misology, anti-science and relativism/constructivism do have practical effects--e.g. in the debate over transgenderism. But it's not clear (to me, anyway) how much they affect practice. Having a guy who doesn't care about the truth as POTUS...that's a clear and present danger.
   My own current view is that Trump's disregard for truth is a more immediate danger, but the left's philosophical rejection of truth, knowledge, and objectivity represent a deeper, more long-term and fundamental threat.