Former President Donald Trump’s predilection for showcasing his power is well-known. His ‘Trump Doctrine’, in fact, was an illustrative case of him exerting maximum authority with maximum exposure against the simplest targets. This was on full display when the Department of Defense was rebranded as the ‘Department of War’. Trump posed a challenge to Chicago, implying a cryptic promise of ‘expulsions’, and casting himself in the role of an adversary, through a social media post.
But the reality is that the general population isn’t resonating with this aggressive posture. The president’s pet project of deploying the National Guard in urban areas hasn’t gained popular consensus. A significant fraction of the U.S population rejects having these troops stationed in their localities. Another contentious policy, mass deportations, which has been pushed through some National Guard deployments, has also faced widespread disapproval.
Survey results indicate that the majority believe these expulsions have crossed reasonable bounds. An increasing number of citizens perceive immigration to strengthen America’s fabric, reaffirming the shift in public sentiment regarding this matter. The populace tends to elect a powerful leader hoping for an end to disorder. The last thing they expect is their chosen leader exacerbating the chaos by instigating needless disputes.
The immigration controversy justifies this point of view substantially. The consensus amongst American citizens is to expel criminally inclined migrants. However, there is a reluctance to uproot immigrants who have peacefully resided in the U.S. for a prolonged period. The situation that unfolded in Los Angeles in June 2025 offers an apt illustration.
Federal agents relentlessly sought the least controversial immigrants, from workers at Home Depot to families who had presented themselves at immigration court appointments. Many of those taken into custody were found to be U.S. citizens. The administration’s actions sparked widespread protests and riots in the city. The situation further escalated when the Marines were dispatched to restore order.
However, this surge did not cast the administration in a favorable light. It was clear to the public that the administration’s actions had initiated the conflict. By targeting innocents, the administration had effectively turned a city into a battlefield. The consequences of their actions certainly indicated a lack of foresight.
When one does not hold power, chaos provides an opportunity to critique the incumbent and make promises about potential improvements. However, when in office, turmoil in the public sphere is a direct reflection of the incumbent’s failing strategies. The president’s approval ratings show a consistent negative trend since assuming office, regardless of the unpopular security policies.
In fairness, despite their poor reception, Trump seemed to fare better on security-related matters than on topics like the economy or his relations with Jeffrey Epstein. His ‘tough guy’ persona resonated with his core supporters, even if it was unpopular amongst a larger audience. Measures such as mass deportations and deploying the National Guard, while unpopular, scored high amongst Republicans.
Interestingly, these measures struck a chord with the extremely partisan and digitally connected circles that the administration appeared to heavily cater to. However, having an audience so heavily concentrated online is rarely advantageous. Taking a look at the other side of the political spectrum, the presidential campaign strategies of Florida Republican Governor, Ron DeSantis, were widely perceived as catastrophic.
The adoption of the ‘strongman’ persona, a factor in his campaign’s downfall, was something even members of his own party criticized. Enthusiasts of Trump took delight in causing what they termed as the ‘largest liberal meltdown in recent times’ through his threats towards Chicago. However, these insinuations to metaphorically ignite the city weren’t received well either.
In hindsight, Trump seemed to acknowledge that his threats were excessive. In an interaction with the press, he clarified his stance, stating that his real intent was to ‘restore cleanliness and orderliness in our cities’. Thus, while ‘tough on crime’ can work as a political strategy, it’s clear that an overly aggressive stance can lead to unwanted consequences.
The post Public Disappointment Over Trump’s Aggressive Stance appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
