New Additions to Donald Trump's Biography

Is there a chance that the New York entrepreneur and reality TV star could go down in history as one of the great American presidents?

Often, historical distance changes how events and personalities are perceived by contemporaries. The saying "history is the teacher of life" applies to this longitudinal perspective as well.

After President Trump's significant second victory, while reflecting on daily political and short-term implications, a broader theme timidly emerged in my thoughts. This theme, I must admit, initially sounded like science fiction or even heresy, but intellectual curiosity pushed me to question the entrenched views of intellectual elites.

In the daunting task of projecting from today’s viewpoint how this pivotal moment in American politics might be perceived years from now, I’ll rely on historical analogies and cold facts, leaving aside heated rhetoric and Trump’s controversial style.

The term “great American presidents” generally refers to U.S. presidents widely known for their exceptional leadership and transformative impact. This group certainly includes the nation’s father, Washington, followed by Lincoln, with more recent examples like FDR and Reagan, though on opposite political poles.

Though it seems controversial, or some might even say inappropriate, to compare these giants to Trump, some analogies do spark intellectual curiosity. Despite leading America in different eras, facing unique challenges, and having different approaches, some historians claim that Trump’s impact on the Republican Party and his reshaping of American politics share parallels with the lasting influences of FDR and Reagan.

It may sound odd today, but both FDR and Reagan were controversial and polarizing figures in their time, just like Trump today. I remember well how, in 1980, critics questioned Reagan’s intellect and understanding of complex issues, shocked that a “B-list actor” could become president.

The list of Reagan’s gaffes was long, like when he claimed that “trees cause pollution.” For both Reagan and Trump, intellectual elites and the establishment used the same descriptor: “not capable and suited for the presidency.” Yet Reagan won the Cold War and entered the pantheon of renowned presidents. Another similarity is that both made decisions independently and swiftly, and both faced similar pre-election poll scenarios where they won despite significant deficits just before election day. Comparisons to FDR might spark even more controversy, as his style and behavior are far removed from Trump’s, but even here, some similarities emerge—particularly accusations of authoritarianism. FDR’s attempt to “pack” the Supreme Court in 1937 raised fears that he was trying to concentrate power in his own hands. Proposing an increase in the number of justices so he could appoint his supporters, Roosevelt alarmed those who thought he was acting like a dictator. His “New Deal” policies were no less controversial.

Many critics, especially conservatives, accused him of overstepping constitutional limits, even using the term “imperial presidency.” His extended mandate and fears of authoritarianism eventually led to the two-term presidential limit.

The analogies don’t end there. Here are more points of comparison in terms of policy, leadership style, and legacy. First, their transformative impact on their respective parties. FDR transformed the Democratic Party into a coalition supporting social welfare, workers' rights, and economic intervention, pushing the party to embrace government as a tool for addressing economic inequalities. Reagan redefined conservatism, emphasizing limited government, tax cuts, and a strong military. His policies and charismatic leadership united fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, and foreign policy hawks, establishing the “Reagan coalition” that influenced the Republican Party for decades.

Trump reshaped the “Grand Old Party” (GOP) with a populist “Make America Great Again” agenda, focusing on immigration control, trade protectionism, and a markedly reduced interventionist foreign policy. He also expanded the GOP’s appeal among working-class voters and emphasized issues like nationalism and anti-establishment sentiments, building a strong base within the party. Additionally, all three presidents focused on economic policy. Roosevelt’s “New Deal” expanded government intervention in the economy, focusing on job creation, social security, and industry regulation.

His policies aimed to address economic inequality and prevent future depressions. Reagan was on the opposite end of the spectrum, following supply-side economics, reducing taxes, and deregulating industries, believing this would stimulate growth. His policies contributed to significant economic expansion that reversed the decline of the 1970s. Trump implemented major tax cuts and focused on deregulation. His administration emphasized economic growth and job creation, achieving successes in reducing unemployment before the COVID pandemic. Trump’s trade policies, including tariffs on China, aim to protect American manufacturing.

Strangely enough, all three presidents appealed to nationalism and American identity. Roosevelt’s leadership during World War II united Americans around the fight against fascism and for democracy. His “fireside chats” fostered a sense of national unity and resilience during challenging times. Reagan projected an optimistic vision of America as a “shining city on a hill,” promoting patriotism and belief in American exceptionalism. His rhetoric during the Cold War underscored America’s role as a leader in the free world. Trump’s “America First” slogan reflects populist nationalism, prioritizing American interests over global commitments. His messages resonated with those who felt left behind by globalization and cultural changes, stirring a sense of patriotism focused on economic and cultural sovereignty.

Perhaps the most telling indicator and entry ticket to the “Hall of Fame” is legacy—the lasting impact. FDR’s legacy endures through programs like Social Security and the belief in government’s role in addressing economic challenges. His four terms set high standards for executive power and left a strong legacy of democratic values focused on social welfare. Reagan’s influence on the Republican Party remains strong; his foreign policy achievements and economic policies, especially his role in ending the Cold War, continue to define conservative ideals.

Trump’s legacy is still taking shape, but he has already laid the foundations for a lasting impact, drawing support from traditionally Democratic regions and embedding populist nationalism within the party. It’s remarkable how, on two occasions, he completely tore down the “Blue Wall,” once the Democratic stronghold in the Midwest.

His judicial appointments, especially to the Supreme Court, and tax reforms will have long-term effects, and his style and approach to governance have set new standards in political communication and leadership style.

A lot of ink has been spilled in the so-called mainstream media lamenting Trump’s communication style, insults, lengthy, winding speeches without clear structure, and incendiary rhetoric. What they, and the Washington elite—certainly the Democrats, but also the Republican “never-Trump” fossils—fail to understand is that times are changing, and they have lost touch with the new reality. Ordinary people are tired of career politicians, empty promises, and the imposition of unnatural new values invented by ultra-liberal academics. They haven’t realized, nor had I until recently, that ten times more people watch Joe Rogan’s podcast than CNN, and read Elon Musk’s tweets instead of the New York Times. And here, Trump is similar to FDR, who recognized the power of a new medium, radio. While Trump, FDR, and Reagan differ significantly in their political philosophies, and certainly in style, the question is not whether history repeats itself but whether it rhymes. Trump’s second term and its outcomes will provide the answer.

Written by: Ivan Trifunovic, American businessman and advisory board member of the Pupin Initiative