I'm not really sure what the author is trying to say. What about Trump is the product of our "obsession" with the presidency, if there is such a thing?
I will readily admit that the presidential powers have grown, including specifically the war-making powers and the Executive Order "legislative" powers. I don't get the connection between that and Trump. I also admit that presidents are pretty good at spinning the truth (see the author's comments on Reagan, Bush, Obama), but that strikes me as being as old as the hills. I don't think the increased executive power has increased our obsession with the office. Shoot, England remains disproportionately obsessed with the Royals who have almost no political power. The article did not make a convincing argument, in my opinion.