Trump's first 200 days hailed as most consequential since Roosevelt
It has been a first 200 days that experts say is the most consequential start to a presidential term for 92 years. That was when Franklin D, Roosevelt set out to save America from the Great Depression and get the country back to work. When President Donald Trump entered the White House on January 20, 2025 he faced a struggling economy, an immigration disaster, and brewing trouble in Europe and the Middle East.
Trump dealt with it all by throwing the political rulebook out the window - he abandoned free trade, upended relations with America's allies, eviscerated his own government bureaucracy, and bombed Iran . All of those measures, according to the naysayers, should have led to disaster. Instead, Trump's supporters are doing victory laps and he is forging ahead at breakneck speed.
'You've not seen anything like this in almost anyone's lifetime. You have to go back to March 4, 1933 (the inauguration of Roosevelt) to have an administration so active and aggressive, and successful in promoting its agenda,' high-profile pollster Frank Luntz told the Daily Mail.
''John Kennedy getting elected in 1960 was a very big deal, but nothing compared to what Trump has done in his first 200 days. He really has remade the governing process. Trump has reset what is acceptable in American politics. It's not that he's played the game better, he's changed the game. He's changed the world. We've never had anyone like him.'
For allies the tone was set by J.D. Vance's speech in Munich on February 14 during which the norms of the transatlantic alliance were, as one eminent European put it, 'smashed to smithereens.' Trump, through Vance, demanded America demanded the Europeans step up their own security and take responsibility for their own back yard.
At home, Elon Musk frenziedly came and went from the White House, taking a chainsaw to government departments. After 200 days, USAID and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are gone, and the Department of Education is on the way out. It happened so quickly that Musk himself is already out the door.
Meanwhile, in Congress, despite small majorities, Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill,' incorporating his tax cuts, made it over the line into law by July 4.
And, as high-profile deportation raids escalated, the number of migrants crossing the border into the U.S. plummeted to levels near zero, which not even Trump's biggest supporters had dared to predict. 'Honestly, I would give the guy A plus,' said Republican strategist David Urban. 'This Trump. 2.0 is incredibly efficient and incredibly efficacious. They're just knocking out of the park at so many different fronts. It seems like almost an entire presidency has occurred in this first 200 days. Amazing. The velocity at which things traveled in this second term is just unprecedented. 'Whether you like the President or not, there's one thing that's undeniable, that he is the most consequential president in our lifetime.'
Urban added: 'He's basically reshaped NATO. He's basically reshaped trade. He's reshaped immigration. I mean huge, huge issues which impact so many people on a daily basis. The President's done what most people thought could not be done. 'There were so many prognosticators of doom on the other side who have been affected by TDS (Trump derangement Syndrome,) who said that if the President does X, then Y is going to happen and the sky will fall. The President has done X, and not only has Y not happened, there's been a positive outcome.
However, as Trump hits the 200 day mark, he faces a new potential showdown with Vladimir Putin and uncertainty over his trade war with China.
And another problem looms over everything - the specter of Jeffrey Epstein. Urban believes the brouhaha will pass, like similar frenzies over the JFK assassination and UFO sightings. 'I think there's no there, there,' he said. 'I don't believe there's some magical list that's people who drink children's blood that's going to satiate anybody.' But the issue threatens to cast a shadow over the next 200 days as Democrats look set to up their attacks on Trump for not releasing the full 'Epstein files,' leading to wild conspiracy theories relating to the late pedophile billionaire. "Well, the Democrats have to. What else are they going to have to propel them back to power?' Larry Sabato, Director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, told the Daily Mail. 'What else do they have unless the economy goes into recession, or has a significant measurable slowdown, or there's stagflation. They have to continue to criticize and they want to take a subject that people seem to care about, that they think this is dividing the MAGA base.
'And it is on that issue. But then Trump's base comes right back together for anything that Trump tells them they should be for. It doesn't change their votes, doesn't change their determination to see him succeed in everything he wants to do.' The Epstein issue is resonating with voters but not impacting Trump's support, he suggested. 'I've already had so many people write to me and say to me in a grocery store, "Look, I'm very upset that they're not releasing all that, shame on Trump for not doing it." But then the next sentence is "I just love this guy, he's been the greatest president of my lifetime." They don't care. So what?' Sabato said the solidity of Trump's base means he will usually poll above 40 percent and that is 'plenty good to run a presidency. You don't need to be over 50 percent.'
'In terms of energy and achievement I would rate the 200 days very highly compared to other presidencies. Now, the other scale would be very, very different, say, wisdom or attention to the Constitution and the customs and traditions that have made America work. And I would give it an F minus. 'Almost every day, we seem to be taking another step down the road to the most extreme polarization we've had since the Civil War.' Trump's success, while celebrated by his supporters, has also created a potential problem for Republicans down the road. according to Luntz, who conducts weekly focus groups with voters. It has resulted in two hugely divergent views of his presidency. Many Republicans are almost euphoric, but many Democrats are more alienated than ever.
'It has been a tale of two presidencies. Those that voted for Donald Trump are ecstatic. He's done everything he promised to do and more. He's done it in a bold and way, and they approved of just about everything,' said Luntz. 'For those who didn't vote for him, it's even worse than they were expecting. They've come to realize that everything he said, he meant.' Trump is a '49 percent president' because he has not added to his support in office, Luntz said. 'This is the difference between him and Ronald Reagan. Reagan was elected with 50 percent of the vote. Trump was elected with 50 percent of the vote. Reagan went out of his way to expand it, and he was successful in doing it. Trump is not seeking to expand his coalition.' That doesn't matter for a president who will not be seeking reelection, but it matters a lot for his successor, and also in the 2026 midterms. 'There is blowback, and that blowback is significant, and the pendulum, when it swings back, is going to swing back with velocity,' Luntz said. 'Eventually, when it's the other side that will win, because it will happen, there's going to be a level of retribution that we haven't seen, that I think is very dangerous for the political system.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's Peace Prize envy is just the latest round in his obsession with one-upping Obama
Donald Trump's renewed efforts aimed at brokering a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia may in fact have their roots in Trump's most famous political grudge. As the president prepares for a summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin in Alaska — potentially to be attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as well — one of his former advisers sees a pattern emerging in Trump's second-term foreign policy agenda that indicates the US president is seriously pining for what he sees as the ultimate sign of global recognition and respect: a Nobel Peace Prize. But what John Bolton described to ABC's This Week on Sunday as Trump's latest fascination may have deeper psychological roots. And the biggest clue providing a glimpse into the president's psyche is the simultaneous focus of his entire national security team on Barack Obama, Trump's first-term predecessor and a figure many have argued propelled Trump's political ambitions through mockery and dismissal. Bolton, who served as Trump's national security adviser, explained Sunday that Trump's peacemaking attempts in Ukraine were part of a clear bid for a Nobel Peace Prize. He pointed to the president's efforts to claim credit for halting other global conflicts as part of the same concerted campaign; the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict, and India's clashes with Pakistan. 'I think what Trump has done is make it clear that he wants a Nobel Peace Prize more than anything else.... the way to his heart? Offer to nominate him,' Bolton told ABC News. Though Bolton said that Trump was having mixed success: 'I don't think what he has done materially changes the situation in -- in any of those circumstances, or several others he's mentioned, like Pakistan/India, where the Indians, not just the government, the entire country are outraged that he tried to take credit for [a peace agreement].' On Friday, the president invited the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia to the White House to sign a peace agreement. The deal is aimed at ending decades of conflict, but builds on a peace process moderated by Russia's Vladimir Putin and a previous agreement crafted by Russia that the two countries signed. Writing Thursday on Truth Social, Trump boasted of his role in reaching the agreement. The agreement between the two nations will create a major trade and transit corridor called the 'Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity.' It will connect mainland Azerbaijan with the autonomous Nakhchivan region, satisfying a major objective of the Azerbaijani government in the peace talks between the countries. Meanwhile, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard and Attorney General Pam Bondi collaborate on an effort to reignite interest in 'Russiagate' and the 2016 investigation into the Trump campaign. And the president himself continues to rage against a man he now accuses of 'treason' and efforts to rig the 2016 and possibly 2020 elections. Gabbard has eagerly echoed his accusations and argued that the Obama administration's efforts to call out Russian election interference efforts should be considered a 'coup'. Bondi acted to give the pair as much political cover at the Justice Department as possible; the embattled attorney general opened a grand jury probe into the 'Russiagate' investigation this past week, even despite a previous DOJ special counsel review finding no evidence of criminal wrongdoing in the case. No charges have been filed yet against Obama or anyone else. Combined with Trump's bid to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, a clear pattern is emerging. As former RNC chair Michael Steele (the only Black chair in the Republican Party's history) wrote earlier this year in an op-ed for MSNBC: 'It's clear that Obama has been living in Trump's head rent-free for the last two decades. Some think he first ran for president because Obama made fun of him at the White House Correspondents Association dinner. He mistakenly called Biden by Obama's name multiple times while campaigning, once even saying he beat Obama in 2016.' 'Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize? Trump spends years obsessing about winning it himself,' Steele added. In March, Bolton saw the connection too. He told the New York Times that Trump 'saw that Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize and felt if Obama got it for not doing anything, why should he not get it?' The Times noted other instances where Trump has publicly and privately groused about not getting the award in spite of Obama's reception. 'If I were named Obama, I would have had the Nobel Prize given to me in 10 seconds,' the president told the Detroit Economic Club last year. The evidence is clear: Trump is entering the latest phase of a years-long obsession with a political foe who consumes more of his attention than Joe Biden and even, at this point, Hillary Clinton. Obama is, in reality, Trump's one unvanquished foe remaining on the left. But he's also the last U.S. president who commanded clear respect and admiration not just in the U.S. but around the world, where he was invited to speak before the legislative bodies of the UK, Canada and Australia as well as to huge crowds elsewhere, like Germany and his father's home country of Kenya. The 44th president, the nation's first Black commander-in-chief, struck a nerve in Trump early and the man who would succeed Obama spent years coordinating a false, racist campaign of abuse centered around Obama's heritage and birthplace. Hillary Clinton won his attention and became a focus of his anger during and after the 2016 election, though she's largely faded from his view. But while the president can order his Cabinet members and aides to launch probes and issue statements tarnishing Obama's reputation, he's found so far that his ability to solve geopolitical conflicts is far more limited. Even as Trump has seen some success bullying U.S. trading partners into line with his 'reciprocal' tariffs, his promises to end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza overnight have dissolved into failure. The international community waits to see whether this grudge-turned-ambition will propel Trump to actually force the end of a three-year war in Ukraine or the bloody siege and starvation of Gaza caused by Israel's blockade, or whether he will once again be frustrated by the realities that have thwarted his efforts so far.
Daily Mail
28 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
NBC anchor Kristen Welker stuns Democrat presidential hopeful
A top Democrat governor was on the receiving end of a brutal takedown from a major TV network host on Sunday. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker had no coherent reply when asked by NBC host Kristen Welker about his state's congressional district maps. Welker noted that 'every major group that grades the fairness of congressional maps, gives' Illinois 'an F.' 'Common Cause, a non-partisan government watchdog, even says your map, and I'm going to quote, "represents a nearly perfect model for everything that can go wrong with redistricting," ' Welker added, pouring salt on Pritzker's wounds. The NBC anchor then added another jab, asking Pritzker point blank how he plans to 'preserve democracy' while 'using the same tactics that [he's] criticized Texas Republicans for.' An astounded Pritzker rattled off a nonsensical answer about the dangers of democracy being attacked in Texas, while dancing around the critique of his own state. Vice President JD offered his own interesting take on congressional apportionment Sunday, when he told FOX News Channel's Maria Bartiromo that 'even Democrats actually admit this, that the census in 2020 had a major statistical error,' which means that maps in many states could potentially be drawn using inaccurate data. Vance added that blue states were overcounted and red states were undercounted. 'What we're living with, Maria, is the consequence of 40 years of institutional control in the Democratic Party,' Vance noted. 'These guys have fought very dirty for a very long time. And they haven't just won elections and enacted laws that we may not agree with. They have tried to rig the game for Democrats and against Republicans,' the vice president concluded. Meanwhile, the Illinois governor has made his state a safe haven for a cadre of Texas lawmakers who fled the Lone Star State last week as a way of stalling a vote on redrawing their congressional maps. Over 50 Democratic state lawmakers fled to avoid voting on a controversial Donald Trump-backed piece of legislation that could help Republicans get more power in Congress. They hopped on a $17,000-an-hour private jet last Sunday, earning the wrath of conservatives who accused them of spending an estimated $100,000 total. It's unclear if the lawmakers used taxpayer dollars to fund their travel or if they 'solicited' outside funds from an outside group, which also has potential legal consequences. Far-right commentator Benny Johnson wrote on X: 'Texas Republicans need to launch an emergency investigation into who paid for this seditious stunt.' Another GOP activist added that 'bribery' should be added to the list of charges against the Democrats who fled. Republican State Rep. Cole Hefner accused them of fleeing because 'they know they're losing the policy argument.' 'Hopping on a private plane to Chicago won't change the facts — they are abandoning their districts and turning their backs on Texans who need help the most,' he went on. The Democrats are working to stall a bill that would redraw the state's congressional maps and eliminate five U.S. House seats presently held by Democrats. It's crucial since the GOP holds a tiny three-seat majority in the U.S. House, so every seat they're able to scoop up could impact whether Trump can push his agenda through in the last two years of his second term. Meanwhile, the 2026 midterm elections are just around the corner. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott promised to 'remove the missing Democrats from membership in the Texas House' for 'abdicating the duties of their office and thwarting the chamber's business.' He also pointed out that the funding of the private jet raises potential ethics concerns and 'bribery' charges. 'Any Democrat who "solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept" such funds to assist in the violation of legislative duties or for purposes of skipping a vote may have violated bribery laws,' Abbott cited according to Texas law. Texas House Democrat Caucus Chair Gene Wu has solicited funds for the stunt on social media numerous times last weekend, asking supporters to donate to his group's campaign account. 'Please support our efforts. Donate to @TexasHDC' Wu wrote on X. Democrats have been stalling a vote on the legislation by the full chamber by not showing up, a procedure also known as 'breaking quorum.' A quorum of 100 members is needed to conduct business in the Texas House of Representatives, but with a majority of Democrats fleeing the state, no work can get done. An estimated 57 Democrats left for Illinois, according to Caucus Chair Wu. Democrat Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker promised to protect the Texas Democrats in his state from arrest because 'they're following the law.' Rouge lawmakers could be fined $500 a day if they refuse to come to work, per a rule adopted in 2021 after Texas Democrats pulled a similar move to postpone another voting bill. Abbott has said that his threat to remove the Democrats from their offices is rooted in Texas law. According to a legal review by the state's attorney general, a legislator can be determined to have 'vacated office' if they intentionally break quorum. Abbott also added that a district court 'may determine that a legislator has forfeited his or her office due to abandonment and can remove the legislator from office, thereby creating a vacancy.'
Times
28 minutes ago
- Times
Vance tells Europe to step up in Ukraine, even though it lacks the strength
Europe needs to 'step up and take a bigger role' in funding Ukraine in its war against Russia, JD Vance, the US vice-president, said on Sunday. Speaking to Fox News, he claimed Americans were 'sick' of spending their tax dollars abroad and Washington was 'done funding' Kyiv. 'If you care so much about this conflict, you should be willing to play a more direct and a more substantial way in funding this war yourself,' he said. He spoke as European leaders again scrambled to build a united defence behind Ukraine, after President Trump suggested he may cut a deal with President Putin that could mean Ukraine has to concede territory. It is clear, however, that even if it remains unwavering in its diplomatic stance, Europe lacks the strength to back Kyiv in negotiating favourable terms in a future peace agreement or to enforce a ceasefire. The so-called 'coalition of the willing' — a multinational force led by the UK and France intended to support Ukraine and potentially monitor a ceasefire — looks highly unlikely to meet Sir Keir Starmer's original hopes of 64,000 troops on the ground. The Kremlin has also said it will not accept western troops in Ukraine, warning that their presence could trigger a new world war. Even if Putin were to agree, European defence ministers have said there is 'no chance' they could reach the 10,000 troops floated by the UK. Even 25,000 as a joint effort would 'be a push', The Times reported in April. 'Russia has 800,000 [troops],' Dovile Sakaliene, Lithuania's defence minister, told European counterparts. 'If we can't even raise 64,000 that doesn't look weak — it is weak.' It falls far short of the 200,000 troops that President Zelensky estimated in January were needed to credibly enforce peace across Ukraine's extensive front line and to prevent a new Russian attack after any ceasefire deal. Experts put the figure at closer to 600,000. The group consists largely of European and Commonwealth countries. So far, the UK and France are the only countries to have committed a specific number of troops. Finland is reportedly concerned that any deployment would 'dilute' its own border defences, while Poland, Spain and Italy have made clear they will not commit any soldiers. Estonia has said it may only be willing to send a company-sized combat unit of ground troops. Proposals have so far been hampered by shortages of manpower, political reluctance and logistical hurdles around the rules of engagement should Russia attack. Financially, Europe overtook the US as the biggest supplier of aid to Ukraine in June, with about €72 billion in military aid compared with the US's €65 billion, according to the Kiel Institute's Ukraine Support Tracker. The US has supplied the most sophisticated and lethal equipment, however, including advanced air-defence systems and precision munitions. Much of Europe's aid finances the purchase of US-made weapons, underscoring its dependence on the country. Zelensky said in January that about 40 per cent of Ukraine's weapons came from the US, about 33 per cent were produced domestically and less than 30 per cent came from Europe. Russia relies largely on its own resources, bolstered by partnerships with China and Iran. North Korea has also supplied between nine and 12 million artillery shells and rockets since 2023. Pyongyang allocates nearly 16 per cent of its government budget to defence, a proportion unmatched by any European state. Last year, EU members spent €326 billion on defence, about 1.9 per cent of GDP — a 30 per cent rise since 2021 — but the US spent nearly $1 trillion, or 3.4 per cent of GDP. JORGE SILVA/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES To close the gap, the EU launched an €800 billion readiness plan aiming to modernise and integrate military capabilities. But progress is slow, hindered by fragmented industries, political divisions and lack of a shared strategy. The EU has imposed 14 rounds of economic sanctions on Russia since 2022, freezing more than €200 billion of Russian central bank assets and cutting energy imports. But Russia has adapted by deepening trade ties with China, India and other non-western partners, while Trump's promise to impose crippling secondary tariffs on buyers of Russian oil have largely failed to materialise. Europe could offer incentives, such as unfreezing Russian assets, as bargaining chips in any settlement. However, that relies on Putin seeing negotiation as preferable to continued war, something that is far from certain. Following an emergency summit on Saturday hosted by David Lammy, the foreign secretary, with Vance and senior European and Ukrainian officials, Kaja Kallas, the EU's policy chief, said she planned to convene an extraordinary meeting of EU foreign ministers on Monday. 'The US has the power to force Russia to negotiate seriously,' she said, and any deal 'must have Ukraine and the EU included'. Kallas framed the talks as a matter for not just Ukraine's security, but the whole of Europe's. European diplomatic efforts are significant but, without military backing, risk being symbolic. The ability to uphold Ukraine's territorial integrity depends on sustained US commitment of weapons, troops and political will.
