Voters tasked Donald Trump with three main objectives: increasing personal wealth, lowering prices on essentials like gas, groceries, and rent, and restoring order at the southern border. These were the priorities they set for him.
However, the mandate did not include radical moves like dismantling the Justice Department, abolishing the FBI, pardoning January 6 rioters, weakening intelligence agencies, eliminating the Department of Education, or making drastic changes to healthcare.
Trump’s early nominations, including Rep. Matt Gaetz for Attorney General, Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense, and Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence, went far beyond the expected scope. Instead of bringing competence to the job, these picks reflected a desire for revenge and a dismantling of key institutions.
As Steve Bannon, a key Trump ally, put it, “It ain’t morning in America,” underscoring the administration’s aggressive approach to reshaping government.
Historically, Americans have been ideological conservatives who wish for a smaller government while also being programmatic liberals who defend essential programs like Social Security and Medicare. This duality was noted by social scientists Lloyd Free and Hadley Cantril in 1967.
Vivek Ramaswamy, working with Elon Musk on government efficiency, suggests Musk is more likely to take a “chainsaw” approach to bureaucracy than a delicate “chisel.” While this boldness may seem exciting to some, it may not be what voters had intended when they cast their ballots. As Ramaswamy put it, “It’s going to be a lot of fun,” but dismantling the government is a far cry from simply reducing its size.
Trump’s actions are part of a troubling pattern seen in past presidencies, where elected officials overstep their mandates. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush both experienced consequences for deviating from the voters’ wishes.
Clinton’s presidency offers a classic example. Though elected in 1992 to improve the economy and the post-Cold War world, he quickly pushed forward initiatives that weren’t part of his mandate, such as his wife Hillary’s healthcare reform and the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.
These moves prompted a Republican backlash in 1994, with Newt Gingrich’s “God, guns, and gays” slogan striking a chord with voters. Similarly, George W. Bush, who won reelection in 2004 on promises to secure the country after 9/11, found his popularity plummet after attempting to privatize Social Security.
The failed proposal, coupled with the repercussion of Hurricane Katrina and the Iraq War, led to a Democratic takeover in 2006, a loss Bush publicly acknowledged as a “thumping.”
The presidency often encourages overreach, as winners are swept up in the power of the office. George Reedy, press secretary under Lyndon B. Johnson, warned that euphoria can cloud a president’s judgment, leading them to exceed their mandate. This sense of power often leaves presidents surrounded by sycophants, with few willing to say “no” to their agendas.
Richard Rovere, writing for The New Yorker after John F. Kennedy’s 1960 victory, observed that Kennedy had received a “victory without a verdict and a majority without a mandate.” Kennedy understood this, resisting calls for sweeping progressive reforms until after his reelection.
Unlike Kennedy, Trump will never face voters again. This lack of accountability makes it even more likely that those around him will treat him as a monarch, isolated from the concerns of the people. Presidents with outsized egos often find their administrations faltering as they push beyond the limits of their mandate.
Before Trump has even had the chance to fully act on his promises, the warning signs of a presidency gone awry are already emerging. Steve Bannon’s remark—“It ain’t morning in America”—captures the situation well. Trump’s victory is quickly becoming a squandered opportunity, as he veers farther from the expectations that brought him to power.