The top 10 negative accomplishments of donald trump's second presidential term
Executive summary
Donald Trump’s second term has already generated sharp public criticism and falling approval: Gallup reports his job approval fell to 36% with 60% disapproval [1], and multiple polls show sustained second‑term lows and broad public concern about his governance and use of executive power [2] [3]. Opinion writers and analysts frame his return as aggressive and potentially authoritarian, while supporters highlight policy goals—sources present clear disagreement about whether these developments are failures or deliberate priorities [4] [5].
1. A collapsing popularity score that fuels political peril
Trump’s approval ratings have declined to new second‑term lows in multiple surveys: Gallup puts approval at 36% with 60% disapproval [1], Reuters/Ipsos and other poll aggregates show similarly weak numbers cited by Newsweek and Forbes [2] [6]. Lower approval narrows political maneuvering room and is the most quantifiable negative outcome of his return so far [1] [2].
2. Worries about executive overreach and governance by fiat
Independent polling finds a majority of Americans say Trump is setting too much policy via executive orders — 51% in the Pew assessment of his first 100 days [3]. Analysts and commentators warn that aggressive use of executive power risks eroding norms; conservative think tanks and centrist outlets alike have recorded anxieties about rapid, unconventional steps in policy execution [3] [7].
3. Accusations of democratic erosion and a “war on institutions”
Opinion pieces argue Trump’s second term has been marked by assaults on democratic norms: The Guardian’s columnist lists actions — defying courts, pardons for January 6 defendants, targeting judges and using agencies against critics — as evidence the presidency is “more lawless and more authoritarian” [4]. Other reporting echoes fears of institutional strain, though sources differ on scale and inevitability [4].
4. Legal entanglements, immunity debates and the question of accountability
Commentators in outlets like The New York Times argue Trump’s second term intensifies concerns about corruption and the difficulty of prosecuting a former president after 2029, underscoring a debate over immunity and future accountability [8]. Available sources do not provide a legal verdict but highlight expert views that prosecution could be unlikely [8].
5. Electoral strategy that critics call “subversion” of future contests
Long‑form analysis in The Atlantic warns that moves this term—coercing firms, investigating officials, questioning limits of free speech and hinting at term‑limit changes—could be aimed at undermining fair future elections and even preparing a run for a third term [9]. That framing is forward‑looking and contested; other pieces emphasize political calculation rather than inevitable collapse [9].
6. Policy moves that alienate allies and reshape foreign posture
Reporting and summaries indicate a shift in foreign policy tone and alliances that some view as damaging: analysts cite embrace of autocratic leaders and undercutting support for Ukraine, and the Wikipedia summary catalogues controversial foreign actions [4] [10]. Supporters argue such moves are deliberate realignment; critics see geopolitical risk [4] [10].
7. Domestic policy shocks with political costs
Observers note shock‑and‑awe tactics in early 2025 that energized supporters but produced backlashes: poor off‑year election results, economic anxiety among voters, and intra‑party rebellions over scandals are highlighted as signs the approach has costs [11]. Polling shows voters cite affordability and shutdowns in lowering approval [2].
8. Social and educational disruptions tied to immigration and schools
Official White House messaging claims steep drops in foreign student enrollment and immigrant populations tied to tougher policies; the statement cites a 17% fall in new foreign students and a decline of about 2.23 million foreign‑born residents since January 2025 [12]. Those figures are presented by the administration as successes; critics note the downstream effects on universities and K–12 systems [12].
9. Deep polarization and mixed public expectations
Pew and YouGov polling document a sharply divided public: Republicans mostly back the agenda while Democrats overwhelmingly oppose it, and large shares of Americans express little confidence in Trump’s respect for democratic values [13] [5]. That polarization amplifies the political cost of controversial actions [13] [5].
10. Conflicting interpretations: disaster narrative vs. deliberate disruption
Commentators like The Guardian and The Atlantic frame the second term as perilous and potentially the “worst” in history, emphasizing democratic risks [4] [9]. Other analyses, including official White House material and some policy watchers, portray the same moves as intentional policy realignment and accomplishments for supporters [12] [7]. Sources differ sharply on whether harms are accidental, strategic, or overstated [4] [12] [7].
Limitations and closing note
This summary draws only on the supplied sources. It catalogues widely reported political and polling setbacks and the critical interpretations attached to them, while noting pro‑administration claims that some outcomes are intended policy wins [1] [12]. Available sources do not mention a definitive, comprehensive ranked “top 10” list agreed upon across outlets; the items above synthesize recurring negative themes and controversies documented in the provided reporting [4] [9] [3].