Oh, come on. If it isn't an orange hair, it's not worth saying.

At The Washington Post right now, there's the headline on the column...

 

... and the teaser on the front page:

 

And though that doesn't seem to me to be something worth reading at all, it's currently ranking #1 on WaPo's "most read." I take that to mean there's still a ravenous demand for anti-Trump porn.

ADDED: The hair-on-the-sleeve metaphor calls to mind clandestine sexual relationships. That orange hair found on your sleeve that should have been noticed and removed — one pictures a wife discovering your adulterous affair. 

AND: Here's the link to George Will's column in case you want to read it. Let me know if he characterizes the Trump haters' relationship to Trump as sexual. 

Oh, I'll read what Will wrote about hair: "Floundering in his attempts to wield political power while lacking a political office, Donald Trump looks increasingly like a stray orange hair to be flicked off the nation’s sleeve." 

Bleh! Mixed metaphor! If something is "floundering," it doesn't look like a stray hair. It looks like a flopping, dying fish. 

And speaking of the "fl-" words in that dismal sentence, flicking isn't the right motion for removing a hair from clothing. Flicking works on dandruff and other small flakes and flecks. You'd better get a pincer grip on that hair and pull. 

No wonder you're having so much trouble with deTrumpification. You don't know how to use the right words, and you don't know how to take the right actions.