While US President Donald Trump has been making the rounds proclaiming the great successes of his first 100 days, the evidence is mounting that his ambitious agenda to remake the government and the country is in trouble. He has been forced into retreat or recalibration on almost every major issue, even on some aspects of immigration, which continues to be his most aggressive and strongest suit.
The most recent polls show a negative swing of almost 14 percentage points away from the President, combining rising disapproval and cratering approval ratings. He retains the fervent support of his base, but has lost significant ground with many of the swing voters who delivered him victory last November. His support among younger voters has declined by 15 per cent, among moderates by 12 points, independents by 11 points and Hispanics by 10 points. He is, in short, in considerable trouble with the voting public, especially those who matter the most.
Mr Trump is persisting with his tariff-driven trade war with China, but has otherwise greatly retreated from the broad-based and highly aggressive universal tariffs announced on April 2. Instead, he is relying on a generalised 10 per cent tax on American consumers of imported goods, with some important exceptions. And there is considerable evidence that he is looking for a way out when it comes to trade tensions with key partners such as Canada, Mexico, the UK and the EU.
The tariffs on Canada (and his stated desire to make it America’s “51st state”) have already managed to reverse the political polarity in that country, delivering a stunning and almost immediate resurgence to the Liberals who were just re-elected over the formerly ascendant Conservatives. Mr Trump’s Canadian allies were defeated precisely because his opponents gained the nationalist credit for standing up to him. It’s a good example of how, trade and economics aside, the ill-considered tariff agenda can backfire spectacularly at the political register.
The real impact of the vast tariff on most Chinese imports has yet to be felt by US consumers. But Mr Trump seems to know what’s coming, observing that children may need “two dolls instead of 30”. This is hardly what he promised voters during the campaign, and visits to department stores such as Target, Walmart and Costco may produce severe political blowback against the White House in coming months.
His agenda to reshape the federal workforce is not fully thwarted, but many of the most far-reaching mass dismissals and agency closures are on hold pending court decisions. Mr Trump has some stalwart allies in the Supreme Court, but he may not be able to command a majority that will agree that he has the power to not spend money specifically allocated by Congress as a matter of legislation. To recognise that would be to upend the most fundamental distinction between the legislature and the executive baked into the US Constitution, and enthusiasm for smaller government may not be enough to secure him a high court majority in favour of such a sweeping and drastic transformation.
Like all presidents, Mr Trump has the freest hand when it comes to foreign policy. But even the biggest transformation – Washington’s apparent shift of support away from Ukraine and towards Russia in their conflict – may be undergoing its own fundamental recalibration.
On Wednesday, Kyiv approved a sweeping minerals deal with Washington that creates a joint investment fund incentivising the US to continue to back Ukraine. It does not provide Kyiv explicitly with the security guarantees it has been seeking, but it’s a big step away from the embrace of Russian military goals that has previously characterised Trump administration rhetoric, to the dismay of many in Washington.
Even on immigration, where the President continues to enjoy high approval ratings, Mr Trump has found many of his most sweeping policies challenged by judges, including some of the most well-known conservatives in the country. The attempt to deport Venezuelan and Salvadoran men without any process and dump them into one of the world’s most fearsome prisons has set up a confrontation over fundamental due process that is unlikely to end well for Mr Trump. And most recently, a judge in Vermont ordered the release of one of the pro-Palestinian students picked up on trumped-up charges of posing a security threat because of criticisms of Israel’s brutal war in Gaza.
Americans certainly want stronger action on immigration, but even among conservatives they generally have a strong regard for the concept of due process and the idea that everyone ought to have their day in court. Images of masked, unidentified agents whisking people away without warning or process, particularly because of their free speech advocacy, ultimately doesn’t have a lot of public support.
And the apparent widespread unpopularity of billionaire Elon Musk, his point person in mass dismissals of federal civil servants, means that this project is likely to have to continue without its leader soon. Mr Trump has said several times that Mr Musk will be returning to his private companies “within months”, and it could even be within weeks if he doesn’t manage to rebuild his credibility.
The biggest question isn’t whether or not Mr Trump’s second presidential term is in big trouble already, but rather if he cares. He is almost certainly a lame-duck, unable to run for re-election in 2028. He and his most extreme supporters, like Steve Bannon, insist there may be some way for him to seek re-election. But not only will he be 82 years old at the time, the Constitution explicitly prohibits it. He couldn’t even run for vice president, relying upon the presidential candidate to resign in his favour after they win, because no one can run for vice president who is ineligible to serve as president.
The US Constitution could not be more explicit in barring any candidate from being elected more than twice to the presidency. Mr Trump may hope to find some way around that, but he hopes in vain. With history suggesting that the midterm elections are likely to return control of the House of Representatives, if not the Senate, to the Democrats, he has about 18 more months to complete his radical transformation of the country. Judging by this start, he won’t be able to fundamentally alter nearly as much as he hopes and many fear.
