Watch This Crazy Old Time Video of Larkin Company

After a series of diplomatic blunders, President Donald Trump and America's reputation loss could "raise the risk of global conflict" and come at a major cost, including "mischief or worse" from enemies.

In an opinion piece published Monday, Bloomberg columnist Andreas Kluth describes how a good reputation can be difficult to obtain or maintain, and Trump "has squandered whatever credibility America had left in foreign and security policy."

Following his rambling speech last week in front of the United Nations and his struggle to see the difference between "personal chemistry" with President Vladimir Putin and diplomatic action, Trump has effectively put both adversaries and allies on edge, wrote Kluth.

"Inklings of danger are everywhere," Kluth writes. "America’s partners are becoming more anxious and making alternative arrangements for their security: Saudi Arabia just signed a defensive pact with Pakistan after watching an Israeli strike against its Gulf neighbor Qatar, which is allied to, but got no help from, the United States. America’s adversaries keep testing the resolve of Trump and the West, as Putin is doing in eastern Europe. Or, like Xi Jinping in Beijing and Kim in Pyongyang, they’re recalculating bellicose scenarios in secret. Other countries, like India, are wary of committing to America and keeping all options open, even clutching hands with Moscow and Beijing."

And although Trump is not the first president to struggle with navigating U.S. reputation among foreign nations, it puts America at an unfortunate future disadvantage.

"Against this backdrop, anybody watching US policy for the past decade, from friendly Europe to adversarial China, already had reason to doubt US credibility. What Trump has done in his second term is to remove the doubts and confirm the loss. Allies now know they can’t trust America, while adversaries are ganging up and recalculating their plans for mischief or worse.

It's unclear what will happen in the future; a damaged reputation jeopardizes diplomacy.

"These responses to America’s loss of credibility will raise the risk of global conflict," Kluth writes. "The danger will go up even more if the US, under this or a future president, panics and decides to overcompensate in reestablishing its reputation, with a demonstratively hawkish turn that could tip into war. If America and the whole world are becoming less safe, it’s because Donald Trump’s foreign policy is, literally, in-credible."

A Democratic voting rights group was "sounding the alarm" Wednesday, warning of a "nightmare scenario" wherein the U.S. Supreme Court could "clear the path for a one-party system" and give Republicans control of Congress.

The high court is slated to rehear Louisiana v. Callais on Oct. 15, and in a new Politico report, Fair Fight Action and Black Voters Matter Fund signal that removing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act could give Republicans a path to redraw up to 19 House seats to benefit their party.

The Voting Rights Act — the landmark Civil Rights-era legislation — has been targeted by Republicans, aiming to remove this particular section, Politico reports.

The move would "clear the path for a one-party system where power serves the powerful and silences the people,” Black Voters Matter Fund co-founder LaTosha Brown said in a statement.

The ruling could also ultimately remove 30% of Congressional Black Caucus seats and 11% of Congressional Hispanic Caucus seats, according to Salon.

This could leave limited options for Democrats.

"Democrats could also find ways to use any changes to the VRA to their benefit. The party could redraw maps in heavily-blue areas with VRA protections to try and expand their margins, but there will be fewer opportunities," Politico reports.

The law has been used to offer protections against racial gerrymandering in redistricting, a topic that's become a key move ahead of midterm elections amid President Donald Trump's push to maintain GOP control in Congress, putting pressure on Republicans to redraw district lines and saying "there could very well be consequences" if they don't take action.