Donald J. Trump and the Perils of Restoration Politics

• In Event: Presidential Leadership and Political Time

Abstract

The general consensus of regime cycle scholars is that George W. Bush was a “regime manager” trying to advance the political project established by Reagan. Unlike his father, however, Bush came to power after an opposition party interlude, placing him in the position of restoring the Reagan agenda after the Clinton interregnum. In Stephen Skowronek’s analysis, regime managers represent the largest and most diverse category in political time. My study takes Skowronek’s taxonomy to a more refined level, studying all presidents who fit this “restoration” sub-category. In earlier papers I have focused attention on the 19th century examples of this category, as well as the 20th century examples of Warren G. Harding (following Wilson) and Kennedy/Johnson (following Eisenhower), and the first 21st century example of Bush. So far, I have uncovered interesting and compelling commonalities and parallels shared by such diverse presidencies as Polk, Pierce, Benjamin Harrison, Harding, Kennedy, and Bush. In this paper I focus attention on the second Reagan era example of this category, Donald Trump, following Barack Obama. As disruptive as his presidency was, Trump in fact shares interesting features with these earlier restoration presidents. How much of his presidency can be attributed to personality quirks, and how much to his setting in political time as a restoration president? Was he self-conscious of his placement, or did he attempt a bolder effort of reconstruction, without the benefit of playing off a president of disjunction? If Bush was a contemporary analog to Polk or Kennedy, is Trump more similar to Pierce or Carter?

This paper is part of a larger project that constitutes a comparative analysis of all “restoration presidents” to determine the extent to which they can act as “free agents” or are bound by prior commitments. The heart of the project consists of an analytical and comparative case study of restoration presidents. I highlight the common political context all these presidents faced, despite their very different points in secular time, and identify what leadership strategies they employed that made them more or less successful. I then determine whether such strategies can be generalized across time. The critical question is how the governing party and its leaders respond to being in presidential exile for one or two terms, during periods of opposition party presidents, and what they choose to focus on when they return to power. This research will provide insight on where we stand now in political time, based on how the Clinton-to-Trump sequence compares with previous “restoration presidents.” The opposition-restoration sequence that repeats in American politics appears to be a primary driver in the regime cycle sequence.

Author

• David A. Crockett, Trinity University