Is it possible to get a word or two in on what historians will say in 2050 about the second term presidency of Donald J Trump? Perhaps I am wrong but I am going to attempt a long-range projection.
I write as an Independent (worn down by political party nausea) wary of the polarized world in which we live. So let me get started.
You can’t be President unless you win more electoral votes than the other candidates. Trump did.
You can’t be President unless the electoral votes are certified by Congress. They were.
You cannot be a consequential President unless your Party controls the Congress. Republicans do.
It is hard to be an effective President if each of your priorities result in a death struggle. This point requires a bit of elaboration.
If, as President, you challenge existing law or funding priorities as they exist, you encounter heavy seas. The fourth branch of government is the status quo. Unofficial Washington is organized to maintain it or enrich it. The President used a new initiative, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), to challenge it and deflect the fire. Elon Musk became the fire shield.
And Trump, notwithstanding denials, came into office with a Plan. Russell Vought, a self-described “radical constitutionalist” strategist and longtime Trump ally, played an influential role in crafting Project 2025—a 920-page Heritage Foundation blueprint for a possible second Trump term.
Vought argues that America’s constitutional structure has been corrupted by a technocratic bureaucracy. He believes the presidency must dramatically reclaim power—even at the expense of legal precedent, institutional restraint, or congressional and judicial checks.
The Plan was comprehensive and took on official Washington. But without Trump’s hardcore support and tactical leadership, the playbook would have been cobwebbed. Even though Trump denied the plans centrality, Vought heads the Office of Management and Budget, as he did in Trump’s first term. My experience: this is the hub of operational Washington.
Trump, or at least I will give him credit, took on the tactical leadership. Many call his leadership style transactional. Regardless, he used a “flood the zone” strategy. Each day, or so it seems, featured a new headline lead. Little gained real traction.
It is also clear that there was and continues to be an intent to exploit prejudice. For example, most recently Trump took over District Of Columbia policing calling the District a crime-infested disgrace. The vast majority of Trump’s base reflexively believes that. And when you take on California or New York, again almost regardless of the subject, Trump’s Red State base salutes.
My Midwest friends were unbelieving when my wife and I moved to New York City. Their view of the City was most likely formed by all the crime dramas on TV with New York as the venue. And almost nobody outside New York likes the Yankees.
Prejudice is a fact. My grandmother’s pot roast was the best in the world. My State or baseball team or University—well they are the best. When prejudice exacts public harm and is clearly immoral we legislate against it. When it is simply human and arguably un-harmful we identify it through polls and react to it in our daily lives.
Politics is one of those daily lives phenomena. Trump himself mused about how protective it can be. “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” We might not like that level of prejudicial support and I certainly don’t, but it is not punishable. In fact, for Trump’s style of leadership it is foundational.
Even after the Trump supporting mob attacked the Capitol in January of 2021, the low point of Trump’s popularity, he still had an overall approval level of approximately 30% and 78% of Republicans continued to approve of him. As his opponents, Nicki Haley and Ron DeSantis learned, Trump’s support was quite solid.
Of course, as Trump takes advantage of pre-existing prejudices, a Democrat can do the same thing. But right now the pre-existing prejudice most noticeable in day-to-day news is the Far-Left’s disapproval of capitalism. Not a winning prejudice outside of left-leaning big cities with a demographic mix unlike much of the rest of the United States.
Trump meanwhile floods the zone. He just met with Putin, Zelensky and a number of world leaders. Several days before, he took over DC policing; one more move in continually reinforcing his base.
And he has chosen to be the most transparent President in modern history. He loves the spotlight and even though most of the Press doesn’t like him, he uses their barely disguised disdain to reinforce his base who share his distaste.
Trump also knows that the two constitutional entities with which he is supposed to share power are by comparison virtually powerless in the face of his aggression. Congress is populated with people who cannot imagine what they would do if they lost their next election. And most Republicans know one thing for sure—the Trump base seems essential to winning the primary.
The Courts structure and history is procedural, appealable and mostly slow. For example, the Constitution gives tariff power to the Congress except in emergencies. Trump, having declared an emergency, has upended laws, treaties, and customs to remake the world of international trade. By the time the most important challenge to the use of this power reaches the final days of a Supreme Court review/decision, the world system of trade will be wholly different. And will persist, at least in part, until the Congress actually acts.
Back to the Democrats. The so-called Center of the Party lacks a widely regarded leader. The Far-Left has two—Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. They are both quite able in asserting their prejudices and ambitions.
And, leading today’s most recognizable political campaign is Zohran Mamdani, who is the Democrat running for Mayor of New York. He is an unapologetic socialist and has supported a “global intifada”, certainly not popular with an important constituency—Jewish voters. Mamdani’s positions trip a number of prejudicial wires.
Politics is often an appearance contest. Votes in elections and Congress are influenced by prejudices regardless of rationality. Trump has mastered the art of prejudicial politics. My view is historians will agree.
Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books.
