The Phoenix has risen from its own ashes, but to what end? In his second term, The Donald will not repeat the sins of inexperience of 2016, but even the opposition has gotten to know him and will not take the bait for media outbursts. Migrant deportations, trade tariffs, overpowering web bigwigs: these are the issues that will inflame the US political debate, and beyond, in the coming months.
January 20, 2025, will mark an extraordinary political rebirth when Donald J. Trump for the second time swears the oath to protect the Constitution and becomes the 47th president of the United States.
Four years earlier, Trump exited in the wake of low approval ratings, false claims that the election had been stolen, and an assault on the Capitol by his followers.
Subsequently pursued by prosecutors for allegations involving his business practices, mishandling of classified documents and election interference, it would have been easy to conclude that Trump’s political career was over.
The rebirth of Trump was the result of both mistakes made by his opponents, including the Biden Administration, and Trump’s own instincts regarding his political base and the powerful currents of populist anger and resentment that were sweeping not just the United States but much of the globe.
These were the instincts of a marketer, which is at heart Trump what is. Through the various travails of his own business career, he learned the importance of brand. In other words, it is easier to be paid to put one’s name on a tower than to actually build the tower. It is a marketing cliché that “one sells the sizzle, not the steak.” He marketed himself in politics the way he marketed himself in business, by making his brash, tough-talking persona the embodiment of the brand, no matter the product or the message. In this way, he built a diverse coalition of interest groups often at odds with each other but united in wanting him as their standard bearer.
Judging from Trump’s pre-inauguration comments on Greenland, Panama, Canada, on the Gulf of Mexico name change, one can see Trump’s old mania for firing off shots.
So, what can we hope for, and fear, from the second Trump Administration?
Internationally, it is to be hoped that after the chaos of his first administration, openly feuding with NATO and other allies while professing admiration for dictators, Trump will see the value of statesmanship. In terms of NATO, the war in the Ukraine, growing tensions with China, rebuilding Gaza, the growth of both Chinese and Russian influence in Africa and Asia, the hope is that Trump will appreciate the importance of allies and the value of seeing one’s foes clearly and without illusion.
The appointment of Sen. Marco Rubio as Secretary of State is one reason for some to hope this may be the case. Rubio’s foreign policy views are generally in line with traditional Republicanism, and he also brings a rare appreciation for the political dynamics in Latin America, a region often ignored by U.S. policy makers.
But judging from Trump’s pre-inauguration comments about Greenland, Panama, Canada and even changing the Gulf of Mexico’s name, one sees the old Trump charism for chaos at work. Whether Trump’s posturing on these issues is simply a negotiating tactic remains to be seen, but one fears that the chaos of the first Trump administration is a foreshadowing of his second.
While he did not campaign on acquiring Greenland or Panama, he did campaign for tariffs. Trump’s commitment to global tariffs could signal the start of an international trade war that would threaten to disrupt the world’s economy. Some Trump watchers think there is a method to his madness, with expansionist fantasies of empire building simply a smokescreen or a distraction from a much more serious economic decision regarding across-the-board tariffs.
Domestically, the two biggest issues of the campaign were inflation and immigration. President-elect Trump has already admitted that rolling prices back to some sort of pre-pandemic level is very difficult. However, in terms of immigration and the deporting of up to 12 million undocumented people in the United States, he and his appointees seem committed to taking action. There is widespread support for some sort of deportation policy, even if disagreement on the parameters of the expulsion. Is it everyone who’s undocumented, the recently arrived, or only the criminals?
One might hope that despite the militant rhetoric of the new administration, Trump could negotiate some sort of consensus on a more reasonable immigration policy. All parties agree that the current immigration system is broken. Whether a compromise similar to what Democratic and Republican senators had hammered out a year ago is possible seems unlikely at this point, particularly because that compromise was vetoed by candidate Trump.
Critics fear is that in attempting any sort of broad deportation policy, the social and economic impact will be destructive. Many economic sectors are now dependent on foreign-born workers. Without some sort of process for legalizing undocumented residents, everything from home construction and agriculture to many service industries will be hurt. This economic risk could provide Trump with the political cover to seek a compromise, but that may still be unacceptable to many of his supporters.
Social conservatives are hoping that Trump will support a national restriction on abortion, roll back rights for transexuals, and continue a general rhetorical campaign against “wokeness.” Trump himself has never been a true social conservative, and during his campaign, he appeared to be satisfied with each state setting its own abortion policy. In terms of restrictions on transsexual rights, he may allow those to be handled state by state as well. However, the social wing of his base is demanding more.
What is clear is that there is much more intentionality on the part of the Trump team at the launch of his second administration. Observers say that in 2016 not even Trump expected he would beat Hillary Clinton. There was little preparation for victory. Key positions were staffed in a rather haphazard manner – whether the nominee looked the part rather than was on board with Trump’s agenda.
That will not be a mistake in the second administration, where virtually every one of the 4,000 political appointees will be vetted for their absolute loyalty to Trump above all else. Trump himself has his own enemies list, and has said he will not hire anyone who is in any way affiliated with those who have opposed him in the past. He has also promised to shrink the size of the federal government and to purge the officially non-partisan federal work force, a century-old institution established to avoid both corruption and inefficiency.
The speed and vigor with which the incoming administration has nominated key personnel suggests that Trump’s wishes are more likely to come to fruition, whether it be tax cuts and tariffs or revenge on his enemies.
One fear is that the consolidation of focused power in the executive branch will weaken the two other pillars of American government: the courts and the Congress. Defenders of the strategy say this will help Trump accomplish many goals that have eluded other presidents. Critics warn this could lead to an erosion of democratic institutions.
With half of Americans once again not voting for Trump in 2024, his potential opposition is large but is not united. Trump’s critics have been exhausted by the past eight years of bitter partisan battles and discouraged by Trump’s reelection. As with any new administration, there may also be a brief lull in partisan bickering as the new team settles in.
But the lack of national consensus on many of the most important issues of the day guarantees that the opposition will eventually arouse itself. With this second Trump administration, opponents say they’ve learned the lesson that they must not respond to every outrage (Canada our 51st state!). To do so is to surrender the news cycle and the agenda to Trump. The challenge facing the Democrats is how not to rise to the bait at every provocative statement. They must choose the battles that will most likely resonate with the majority of voters.
Their success in the 2026 midterm elections will in large part depend on how well they meet this challenge.