Is Donald Trump not a good president? And give me some reasons why Trump is a bad president.

1. Why critics say Trump is “not a good president”: erosion of institutions and norms

Numerous analysts argue Trump has weakened democratic norms and checks and balances by publicly attacking courts, Congress and the press, using aggressive executive actions, and sidelining oversight — a theme in policy analyses and commentaries that claim his rhetoric and actions erode institutional constraints (Centre for European Reform; Brookings; ACLU) ^{[3] [7] [8]}. Legislators and trackers report executive moves they say “weaken democratic institutions” and aggressive interventions against universities, firms, and critics as evidence of that pattern ^{[9] [3]}.

2. Communication style and credibility: chaos, falsehoods, and public confidence

Reporters and fact‑checkers document repeated false or misleading public claims and erratic communications that, critics say, undermine government credibility and public trust — CNN’s catalog of false claims from a 60 Minutes interview and long‑standing tallies of misleading statements are cited in this vein ^{[10] [11]}. Polling shows many Americans think he is trying to exercise more power than predecessors and disapprove of his executive‑heavy approach ^{[4] [2]}.

3. Governance failures cited: pandemic response and administrative competence

Scholars and policy writers have pointed to Trump’s pandemic response and episodes of managerial disarray as central governance failures — Brookings’ critique argues failure to shift from campaigning to governing during the coronavirus crisis, with rhetoric and organizational missteps worsening outcomes ^[7]. Opponents use these episodes to argue he struggles with complex policy implementation ^{[7] [12]}.

4. Economic policy: contested results and risks of interventionism

Some outlets note short‑term economic indicators that supporters highlight, while analysts warn of long‑term risks from tariffs, industrial interventions, and cronyism. Chatham House and POLITICO describe potential economic damage from undermining institutions and from an interventionist, unorthodox industrial policy that critics label “crony capitalism” ^{[13] [5]}. Supporters and some conservative outlets counter that Trump’s policies prioritize American industry and have tangible near‑term gains ^{[6] [14]}.

5. Foreign policy: caprice and alliance strain

Coverage in major papers documents an erratic, sometimes mercurial foreign policy that has unsettled allies — The New York Times and other analyses describe unpredictability in dealings with partners and adversaries, even as some European states increase defense spending in response to U.S. shifts ^{[15] [3]}. Critics frame this as damage to long‑standing alliances; defenders say it forces allies to take greater responsibility ^[16].

6. Public opinion and political consequences

Polling and election results reveal political costs: AP‑NORC and Pew surveys show persistent partisan splits but substantial public disapproval and concern about use of executive power ^{[1] [2]}. Coverage of recent elections and analyses in The Economist and New Republic argue that economic anxiety and policy outcomes have driven electoral setbacks for Trump‑aligned candidates in some contests ^{[17] [18]}.

7. Supporters’ perspective and acknowledged achievements

Conservative outlets and the White House point to policy wins — regulatory rollbacks, border and energy actions, anti‑CBDC executive orders, and industrial initiatives — as evidence of decisive leadership and durable change that will be hard to reverse ^{[6] [19] [20]}. Some analysts acknowledge short‑term economic strength in certain quarters and credit Trump with forcing allies to spend more on defense ^{[14] [16]}.

8. Big-picture judgement: contested, evidence‑based, and partisan

Scholars, editorial pages, and advocacy groups explicitly label Trump among the worst presidents for reasons ranging from norm‑breaking to incompetence and corruption ^{[21] [22] [23]}. Other commentators stress his transformative policy agenda and political durability. Available sources show a deep partisan split: where critics emphasize institutional harm and fact‑checked falsehoods, supporters emphasize policy outcomes and assert he is delivering on promises ^{[11] [6] [24]}.

Limitations and final note: this review synthesizes the provided sources; it does not adjudicate beyond what those sources report. If you want, I can produce a side‑by‑side list of specific documented incidents (with citations) that critics most often cite as evidence Trump is a “bad” president and a matching list of administration‑claimed achievements.