Donald Trump will be sworn in as the 47th president of the United States on January 20 2025. At that point he will become the first US president since Grover Cleveland – 130 years ago – to serve two non-consecutive terms, having lost the White House only to regain it four years later. In securing four more years in the Oval Office, Trump now has the opportunity to not just be a controversial figure, but to become a historically consequential president as well.
The eminent historian, H.W. Brands, argues that there have only been three great US presidents: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR), an opinion with which scholarly opinion polls typically agree.
All three presidents had something in common: dealing with epochal issues and crises. Washington had to win the war of independence and ensure that the United States was established and on a firm footing at home and abroad. Lincoln had to win the civil war and address the nation’s original sin of slavery. FDR was faced with saving the capitalist system following the Great Depression and had to defeat fascism in the second world war.
Therefore, for most presidents, the goal is to be in a second tier of rankings among popular and scholastic memory. These are presidents who changed the direction of the country by influencing its political discourse and public policy. To do this, a president must win two terms of office.
Previous presidents, such as Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama, can certainly lay claim to being considered to be consequential political leaders on these terms. Reagan reversed decades of economic and political consensus by declaring, in his first inaugural speech, that: “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.”
As impactful as the policies of Reaganism may have been, it was his rhetoric that actually set the US political agenda for nearly 40 years.
Obama’s signature domestic reform, the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) may once again be under threat of Republican repeal, and this time his old adversary John McCain is not here to save it. Obama’s promise and belief in the optimism of American progress was probably more his real legacy, but was perhaps simply masking the partisanship and divisions under the surface.
Trump 2.0
The response to Trump’s political comeback is as divisive as the man himself. His proponents welcome a political realignment to the extent that the Republican party is now the voice of blue-collar Americans in opposition to the elitism of the Democratic party.
Trump’s opponents say he will position the US on the side of authoritarians and drag the country – and the wider world – into economic turmoil if he follows through with his threat about tariffs. And the idea of a convicted felon limiting employment opportunities for his fellow Americans may also be questioned following his reelection to the highest of political offices, let alone concerns about the future of American democracy.
But there’s no arguing against the proposition that, having won a second term which means he will have utterly dominated US politics for a decade or more, that Trump is a consequential president. He has made the Republican party into the party of Trumpism. And by choosing J.D. Vance as his vice-president, he has potentially settled the question of a legacy for the Maga movement with the potential to carry on into another generation.
On the international stage – and as a political disruptor – Trump will be a source of uncertainty for governments from Europe to Asia. There are those that argue his is an effective foreign policy approach. His supporters make a great deal of the fact that there were no major wars during his first administration like the ones that now imperil the world today. And to be sure, his inconsistency and the uncertainty that this brings, could be viewed as the embodiment of the “madman theory” which holds that an unpredictable leader is an effective deterrent in the era of nuclear arsenals.
But this will be little comfort for Ukraine, which may no longer be able to count on US support, or for the Nato alliance, for similar reasons.
Challenge for the Democrats
Everywhere from the corridors of power to social media sites will be speculating about the 2028 presidential race. It is here that we will see the real consequence of Trump’s election.
The Republicans will be searching for the candidate best placed to maintain Trump’s coalition. Indeed, “broad coalition” does now seem to be a fair description of the Maga movement. Democrats can no longer point to incredibly marginal Republican victories in swing states as they did in 2016. Indeed, they can no longer say that Trump has not been chosen by the majority of American voters. After being beaten in the popular vote by both Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020, he took the popular vote in 2024 by nearly 5 million votes over Kamala Harris.
Trump increased support for the Republicans in safe blue states such as New York. He has gained support across different demographics, including Hispanics and African-Americans
The challenge now is for the Democrats to change. They need to once again learn the language and address the issues that matter most to the American heartlands. Bill Clinton and his “New Democrats” were the consequence of the Reagan revolution, even declaring that the era of “big goverment” was over as he looked ahead to his own reelection in 1996. Obama was a generational political talent in coalition building, albeit bookended by Republican presidents able to reach beyond their traditional support, particularly with minority voters.
Trump has changed the game in US politics. He may be a highly divisive character who has both provoked and capitalised on the emotions of a deeply divided country. But it’s impossible to argue against the proposition that, in the broad sweep of US political history, the man who has become America’s 45th and 47th president won’t be remembered as a figure of major consequence.