Part 6 in a series of letters to Trump voters

I’m betting most of you who voted for Trump thoroughly enjoyed the inauguration and his first two weeks in office. He hit the ground running with a blitz of executive actions making good on a host of campaign promises. He was confident in taking these aggressive and decisive actions given the “mandate” voters provided him. And this mandate was only bolstered by his rising approval numbers in the weeks before taking office.

Voters gave Trump a 49.9% to 48.4% win in the popular vote, a margin of some 2.3 million votes. He was the first Republican to win the public vote in 20 years.  In late December, Trump’s approval ratings were at 51%, his highest ever according to Gallup. While these numbers slipped a bit to 49% in Gallup’s next poll (January 2-15, 2025), Trump entered the White House with his job approval rating essentially matching his popular vote win.  FiveThirtyEight’s average of polls also has him at 49%, while a Rasmussen poll has him at 52%, and Real Clear Politics has him at 48.9%. These numbers stand in sharp contrast to Biden’s 40% approval rating as he left office.

Riding this wave of popularity, the stage is set for President Trump to reach new highs in terms of job approval.  Vast majorities of Americans support deporting undocumented immigrants who are criminals.  We also support securing the nation’s borders.  In addition, most Americans also support renewing most of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts. Those of us who voted for Harris only differ on taxing the rich (around 2% of taxpayers), and not further lowering corporate taxes.  And vast majorities of Americans also support Trump’s commitments to lower the cost of groceries, gasoline, insurance, and other commodities. Most Americans even support his calls for better management of wildfire risks, including better forest management, prescribed burns, and hardening our homes and communities.  The list goes on, but you get the picture. 

Consequently, as Trump enters his second term, we have a critical barometer that you who voted for Trump—and indeed all Americans—should be keeping an eye on. If Trump’s job approval numbers increase above 49.9% (the percentage of Americans who voted for him), we can conclude that he is picking up support from those who voted for Harris.  On the other hand, if his approval numbers drop below 49.9%, we can conclude that he is losing support from some of you who voted for him. 

Many of you who voted for Trump will probably caution that a president’s job approval numbers don’t necessarily reflect the effectiveness of performance.  Presidents must often make hard decisions that are unpopular. You could also correctly point out that virtually all presidents suffer in terms of approval ratings as their terms play out.  I agree with you on both counts.  However, it’s not me you need to convince. Rather, if Trump’s approval ratings drop below 49%, it means that some of you who voted for him no longer approve of his performance. 

In this article I want to reach out to you—Trump voters—to identify reasons why Trump’s job approval numbers are likely to slip at a time he could be broadening support for his policies. In particular, I want to focus on the manner in which Trump is executing his role as President.  In his rush to take bold, unilateral and decisive action, he may be alienating significant percentages of those who voted to put him in office. And he may also be wasting opportunities to gain even more success and popular support by working in an even-handed and bipartisan manner.  I sense you’re shaking your head at me, but let’s take a look.

Trump’s approval numbers are subject to decline because some of his executive actions dictate and control policies that legally and historically have been reserved to either the legislative branch or the judicial branch of federal government.

Under our Constitution we have a separation of powers and a set of checks and balances that prevent any one of the three branches of government from exercising too much power. The role of Congress is to make the laws, the role of the judiciary is to interpret the laws, and the role of the President is to execute the laws. When a President ventures into making and/or interpreting the laws, this usurps roles of Congress and the judiciary. It also conflicts with the separation of powers.  Americans are likely to take a dim view when President Trump acts in conflict with the separation of powers.

Without attempting to be exhaustive, let me list just two of Trump’s actions that fly in the face of legality and historical precedent:

• Trump’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a memo that paused vast amounts federal spending that had already been legally committed by Congress or the executive branch.  A federal court immediately struck down this action, and Trump rescinded the action within a couple of days.
• Trump issued an executive order that rejected the long-standing interpretation of the Constitution, including Supreme Court decisions, that children born in the US to undocumented immigrants enjoy “birthright citizenship.”  Heretofore, it has been the job of the US Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution. And it is the job of Congress to make laws. By issuing this executive order, President Trump made his own legal declaration that the language of the 14^th Amendment didn’t apply to the children of illegal immigrants. He argues these children are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and thus aren’t covered.  But the US Supreme Court has long held that children of illegal immigrants are covered. Rather than respect the role of the Supreme Court, as he did in the case of repealing abortion protections, he announced his interpretation and directed immediate adherence to this interpretation going forward. Within a few days, a federal court declared this action unconstitutional and stayed the executive order. 

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 59% of respondents, including 89% of Democrats and 36% of Republicans, oppose ending birthright citizenship. 

Trump’s approval numbers are subject to decline because some of his executive actions or proposals are controversial with the America public.

• On his first day in office, Trump pardoned approximately 1,500 criminal defendants charged in the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol.  About 1,200 of these individuals had already been convicted and were serving time.  Another 300 charged individuals had their cases dismissed. A Reuters/Ipsos poll released a few days later found that 58 percent of Americans are not in favor of President Trump pardoning all of the people who were convicted of crimes.   A mid-December Statista survey found that even majorities of Republicans did not support the pardons when it comes to those committing violent crime or those assaulting police officers.

• The same Reuters/Ipsos poll linked above found that 79% of respondents oppose the renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.
• Trump offered a series of recommendations or proposals for expanding the territory of the United States, including taking over the Panama Canal, getting Denmark to hand over or sell Greenland to America, and having Canada join the US as the 51^st state. Ipsos polling (see below) shows that vast majorities of Americans, including majorities of Republicans (see topline, pages 16-18), don’t support these proposals.

Trump’s approval numbers are subject to decline because he is walking back promises made to Americans and making statements that are either outright false or lacking evidence.

Again, without attempting to be exhaustive, here are some examples:

• Trump promised that he would have the war between Russia and Ukraine settled within a day, and before he was even in office.
• Trump promised to bring down the costs of groceries, gasoline, and to end inflation.  In a November 2024 interview with Time magazine, he admitted that “It’s hard to bring things down once they’re up.” 
• In setting up his new Department of Governmental Efficiency (DOGE) there were promises of cuts of at least $2 trillion in government spending.  Elon Musk has since acknowledged that this figure was “aspirational” and there was a good shot at cutting maybe half of this amount.
• On Truth Social on Monday, January 27^th, Trump stated that the US military entered California, and under emergency powers, “turned on the water flowing abundantly from the Pacific Northwest and beyond.”  This did not happen.  Instead, according to state officials, federal water pumps were restarted after they were offline for maintenance for three days.  They added, “State water supplies in Southern California remain plentiful.”
• A Black Hawk helicopter and a jet airliner tragically collided in Washington D.C. on January 29th. Within about 12 hours, Trump, without citing evidence, claimed that DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) programs for air traffic controllers under Presidents Obama and Biden were partly to blame.  At the time he made these statements, bodies were still being recovered and the investigation into the cause of the accident was only hours old.  When asked how he could conclude that DEI policies had something to do with the collision, he said, “Because I have common sense, OK, and unfortunately a lot of people don’t.”

Trump’s approval numbers are subject to decline if he is unable to convince Congressional Republicans, especially his very slim majority in the House of Representatives, to pass his legislative priorities.

Republicans have a 6-seat advantage in the Senate (53-47) and a very narrow 3-seat advantage (218-215) in the House. With Republican Elise Stefanik’s impending resignation to become Ambassador to the United Nations, Republicans will only have a 2-seat advantage.  A special election has been called for April 1^st to fill two vacancies caused by the resignation of House members from Florida. The special election to replace Stefanik has not yet been set.

Congressional Republicans are loyal to Trump, but in the House of Representatives there is a faction of some 31 fiscally conservative “budget hawks” that comprise the House Freedom Caucus.  These members are laser-focused on reducing the $36 trillion National Debt, and the $1.8 trillion deficit for the current fiscal year. They won’t support new spending unless accompanied by cuts that not only pay for the spending but also reduce the National Debt. Meanwhile, President Trump wants to push forward with major spending for his tax cut package and immigration enforcement.  Here is a summary of the tightrope he walks:

• Trump’s tax cut package pencils in at least $4 trillion ($4.6 trillion according to the Congressional Budget Office) over ten years.  Costs will increase if all of his campaign promises are included (e.g., no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime, eliminating the $10,000 deduction cap for state and local taxes). 
• Establishing border security and conducting mass deportations can’t be accomplished without new spending.  There is currently a proposal for $100 billion in additional spending for a border package.
• The budget hawks say they need a net $3 trillion cut in federal spending over the next decade, and they are prepared to oppose a plan that only secures half of that amount. They suggest putting draconian cuts on the table such as cuts to Medicare, Social Security, health care, and elimination of the home mortgage deduction.  Trump has previously told voters he would not cut such programs.
• Trump is proposing a series of tariffs that he says will supply the revenue needed for his tax and border packages.  However, many fiscal experts have cautioned that the costs of tariffs will be passed on to consumers. This could seriously threaten Trump’s promises to bring down costs and beat inflation.
• Trump is also recommending that yet uncommitted funds from Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act be clawed back and committed to his priorities.  However, many Congressional Republicans have cautioned regarding this move. Projects within their districts are proving to be popular and beneficial.
• Trump and the Republicans are planning to do the tax cut and border security packages without help (votes) from Democrats. They are planning to move one or two reconciliation bills. Measures proposed through the “Budget Reconciliation” process can be enacted via a simple majority in each chamber.  Otherwise, Democrats could surely prevent passage of Trump’s bills in the Senate, where Republicans lack the 60 votes necessary to prevent a filibuster. The downside of ruling out compromise with Democrats means Trump must get virtually every House Republican to support his legislative proposals.
• House Republicans understand the gravity of the situation and recently met with Trump over three days at his Doral Resort in Miami.  They were unable to come up with a deal.  

Trump’s approval numbers are subject to decline because it is unlikely he will be able to make good on his promises to bring down the cost of groceries, gasoline, inflation, insurance, and interest rates and other consumer goods.

It’s relatively likely that the cost of the items mentioned above can be stabilized. However, bringing them down to levels that existed in 2019, 2020, or 2021 is a very different matter.  Many prices peaked in the summer of 2022, when inflation hit 9.1%. Those high prices got “baked in,” and in order to bring them down, inflation would essentially have to go negative. Also, interest rates on home mortgages, credit cards, and car purchases aren’t going to come down much in the near term. The Federal Reserve has paused in lowering the Federal Funds Rate, and the President has no control over this independent body.

Democrats will certainly communicate widely about Trump not meeting his promises to bring down costs and inflation.  And should Trump implement tariffs, and should costs and inflation increase further, he will certainly face criticism for allowing this to happen. 

Finally, Trump’s approval numbers are subject to decline if some of his key initiatives—such as tariffs and mass deportations—turn out to have severe economic consequences for Americans and our country.

As Trump institutes his various tariffs, we’ll find out whether the affected countries decide to respond in kind. Regardless, it will be the American company that imports the commodity that pays the tariff, not the country (China, Mexico, etc.).  The cost of the tariff is likely to be passed on to the American consumer. This means higher costs and more inflation; and even conservative organizations such as the Tax Foundation agree.

Much has been written about the cost and economic impact of mass deportations. If you’re interested, here’s a sampling from Brookings, the American Immigration Council, and the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Of the 11+ million undocumented immigrants living in the US, around 8.3 million are in the workforce.  As you can see below, the undocumented constitute large shares of certain occupations, including drywall installers, roofers, painters, construction workers, masons, and housekeepers and maids. The numbers don’t include cooks and food service workers, as they are separately reported.

The numbers above also don’t include agricultural workers, who are also separately reported. Undocumented migrants constitute about 42% of the US agricultural workforce in 2022, as you can see below.

Deporting millions of undocumented immigrants will not only be extremely costly to the federal government and taxpayers (at least $315 billion according to one estimate) but will also cause significant disruptions to the US labor market.  Will there be workers to replace them, and how long will it take? And will the costs of labor increase? 

Americans are not going to be happy if they can’t secure services or goods that depend so heavily on undocumented immigrant labor.  And if their costs go up because undocumented immigrants disappear from the workforce, Americans again may take a dim view of the person who caused this.

On the other hand, Trump stands a good chance of improving his job approval numbers if he refrains from hyper-partisan politics and pursues his agenda by working with Democrats in an even-handed and bipartisan manner.

Democrats and Harris voters embrace many of positions and policies that Trump is pursuing.  They support deporting serious criminals and going after the drug cartels. They support securing the nation’s borders.  In addition, they support renewing most of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts. They also support lowering the cost of groceries, gas, insurance, and other commodities.  And they also support better management of wildfire risks, including prescribed burns, forest management, and hardening our homes and communities. 

Instead of Trump going it alone, demonizing his opposition, and trying to impose his agenda by working with a precarious Republican majority, there is a better way.  I suggest that if he is willing to make modest compromises on matters where there is common ground he stands a greater chance of executing his agenda.  He also stands a much greater chance of increasing his job approval ratings and enjoying a successful presidency. 

Let me give you a glimpse of what I am talking about—some approaches Trump could take to secure more success:

• The bipartisan Laken Riley Act he just signed into law is a good example of collaboration to achieve an end where there is common ground. Under the law, federal officials are required to detain any migrant arrested or charged with crimes that include shoplifting, assaulting a police officer. or crimes that injure or kill someone.
• Trump could work with Democrats for more bipartisan efforts on immigration.  For instance, in return for legalization of the status of Dreamers, Democrats could support more border security. This could include more enforcement personnel, removing backlogs in immigration court cases, and more statutory authority for the President to close the border.  Democrats supported such measures in the compromise bill they helped put together in February 2024.  In addition, the parties might also agree to review policy alternatives to birthright citizenship, including what might be possible under the language of the Constitution (14^th Amendment).  Finally, Trump might be willing to enter into a bipartisan compromise that allows some portion of the 11 million illegal immigrants to stay. For instance, is it really necessary to deport migrants who have been in the country for ten or more years or more, and who are law abiding and working to support our economy?
• Trump could also work with Democrats on his tax package.  Democrats support renewing the vast majority of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts.  The main exceptions relate to the less than 2% of taxpayers who are very wealthy.  Not renewing their tax cuts generates a huge amount of revenue that could pay for other parts of the tax package. In addition, Trump may decide he need not further reduce corporate tax rates. A bipartisan solution with Democrats might even be preferable if Republican budget hawks insist upon huge and unpopular spending cuts as a condition for approving his tax package.    

In the final analysis, if Trump is able to improve his job approval numbers, this improves the odds of Republicans maintaining control of Congress in the 2026 midterms; on the other hand, if Trump’s approval numbers drop significantly, this increases the odds that Democrats will capture one or both houses of Congress in 2026, along with the presidency in 2028.   

Recent history is clear that presidents with low approval ratings only serve for one term and usually lose control of at least one chamber of Congress in the midterm elections of that first term.  Trump won in 2016 and came in with control of both the Senate and House.  He was unpopular for most of his first term, and lost control of the House in the 2018 midterms.  He then lost to Biden in 2020, and went out of office with low approval numbers.  Biden’s win was accompanied by winning control of both the House and the Senate.  He became unpopular fairly early in his term and lost control of House in the 2022 midterms.  Biden went out of office with low approval ratings, and Trump beat the Democratic nominee (Harris).  His 2024 win was accompanied by control of the House and Senate.  

If Trump’s approval numbers go south, especially to 40% or lower, it’s likely that he will lose control of either the House or Senate (or possibly both) in the 2026 midterms.  And, if those low approval ratings persist, history says a Democrat will be elected president and gain control of both chambers of Congress.  If that happens, history again tells us the consequences.  The new president and party in control of Congress will wipe out many of the policies that Trump and his supporters labored to put in place.  Obama did this to Bush, Trump did this to Obama, Biden did this to Trump, Trump is now doing this to Biden, and in 2029, a Democrat will do this to Trump.

Maybe you believe Trump will be effective as president even if he loses one of the chambers of Congress in 2026. Maybe you believe a Republican will be elected as president in 2028, even if Trump struggles with low approval numbers during his term.  That’s your choice. 

All I’m saying is that we should keep an eye on Trump’s job approval numbers. In my view his agenda has a greater chance for success and durability if he refrains from hyper-partisan politics and unilateral decision making.  If he is willing to compromise and adopt bipartisan solutions, he will improve his approval ratings, be a more effective president, and possibly put a Republican in the White House in 2028.