How will Donald Trump be remembered in 2066?

[This account no longer in use.]

50 years from now, when people think of the name 'Trump', what will they think of?

[beaver2.0]

Depends what he does in 2020/24/28.  I imagine people will think of him like Dewey, a guy who almost got to the Presidency, but didn't.  Probably the source of endless speculation.

[Vosem]

Analogously to George Wallace; a man who made several runs for President representing a dying way of thought, who did shockingly well but ultimately never even came close to the White House and destroyed his health while doing so. (This assumes that he continues running over the next several cycles, even as he enters his 70s).

[PeteB]

The reaction will be "Donald who?"

[beaver2.0]

The reaction will be "Donald who?"

I don't think so.  I guess it depends who you ask, but most educated people (I think) know who George Wallace was.  Maybe the average person won't, unless he becomes President.

[Famous Mortimer]

If he loses: Some racist who ran for president.

If he wins: The greatest president ever.

[All Along The Watchtower]

I think it is safe to say that there will be enough buildings with TRUMP's name on them that people won't easily forget about the man.

[Leinad]

If he loses: a rich guy/celebrity who ran for President and pissed off a lot of people. Also probably the most surreal, unorthodox-yet-nearly-successful candidate of all time. Probably also as the guy who got shellacked by Hillary, but maybe I'm underestimating him?

If he wins: either his term will be erased from collective memory as a dark moment in America's history, or all previous time will be erased from collective memory and King Donald I will be remembered as our nation's founder and the first patriarch of the House of Trump. (Partly joking.)

Either way, one of the most fascinating figures in American history. (And that's not a joke at all.)

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

If elected? By being burned in effigy on the annual Orange Man night, when his death is widely celebrated with fireworks and parties.

If unelected, by a handful of old men pissing on the rusting fence around his often-desecrated grave.

Both are more than he deserves.

[Boston Bread]

Analogously to George Wallace; a man who made several runs for President representing a dying way of thought, who did shockingly well but ultimately never even came close to the White House and destroyed his health while doing so. (This assumes that he continues running over the next several cycles, even as he enters his 70s).

Trump does not represent a dying way of thought, his ideology is the future of the GOP.

[Figueira]

Analogously to George Wallace; a man who made several runs for President representing a dying way of thought, who did shockingly well but ultimately never even came close to the White House and destroyed his health while doing so. (This assumes that he continues running over the next several cycles, even as he enters his 70s).

Wallace's ideology was widespread and open in the preceding years, though. Trump's ideology seemingly came out of nowhere (it was there, but no one wanted to admit it). If anyone today is analogous to Wallace, it would be Cruz.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

An artifact of turn-of-the-millennium America's obsession with celebrity and reality TV, and a monster created by the news media, who cared more about ratings than objective journalism.

[Vosem]

Analogously to George Wallace; a man who made several runs for President representing a dying way of thought, who did shockingly well but ultimately never even came close to the White House and destroyed his health while doing so. (This assumes that he continues running over the next several cycles, even as he enters his 70s).

Trump does not represent a dying way of thought, his ideology is the future of the GOP.

_trump is literally the candidate of places with high mortality rates, and he's consistently done very poorly with young Republican voters (consider that, even as Rubio lost Nevada by 22 points, exit polls still had him winning the under-30 crowd by 6 points; not all states have had exit polling, but you'll find that Rubio won the under-30 vote in Virginia; Cruz won both Carolinas, Arkansas and Missouri among the under-30; _trump also won the under-30 vote in Michigan and Illinois due purely to the strong Kasich performance, and lost the 30-44 vote in both states to Cruz).  It's a way of thinking that is dying out not just figuratively, by people abandoning it, but literally, with those who hold it dying and not getting replaced.

Interestingly enough, the one part of the country where this trend is reversed is New England; Massachusetts is more muddled, but in VT and NH _trump is stronger among the youth and weaker among olds (in VT, Kasich won the over-65 crowd only). However, this is probably due to the unusual circumstance of there still being many Rockefeller Republicans voting in the Republican primary giving an illusory anti-_trump strength to the old; and regardless the region isn't particularly important to the GOP.

Kasich and Rubio encapsulate the future of the GOP far more than _trump does, to wit. (The whole metric is flawed, because as 2008/2012 showed Republican youngs have strong libertarian inclinations and this race hasn't really given them an option; either way my general point should've been made pretty well).

[RINO Tom]

Analogously to George Wallace; a man who made several runs for President representing a dying way of thought, who did shockingly well but ultimately never even came close to the White House and destroyed his health while doing so. (This assumes that he continues running over the next several cycles, even as he enters his 70s).

Trump does not represent a dying way of thought, his ideology is the future of the GOP.

LOL, bet you'd like that.

[Clark Kent]

A mildly interesting footnote in the history textbooks (or whatever we're using by then).

[Likely Voter]

Remember by 2066 the US should be a majority-minority country. I think he will be seen as a populist last gasp of white identity/anti-immigrant politics before the country became more inclusive. Sort of like George Wallace was a last gasp of segregation/jim crow politics.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Like Barry Goldwater, a man destroyed and vilified in his own election bid but whose successors accomplish nearly every plank in the platform.

[The Mikado]

The destroyer of an old, corrupt, archaic America predicated on false ideals and the founder of a new America, unburdened with outdated notions of liberty and equality and justice, that boldly bestrode the 21st century like the Colossus.

[PaperKooper]

Like Perot is now, but even less relevant or significant. 

[Young Conservative]

He has certainly left a historical mark

[Ronnie]

Kasich and Rubio encapsulate the future of the GOP far more than _trump does, to wit. (The whole metric is flawed, because as 2008/2012 showed Republican youngs have strong libertarian inclinations and this race hasn't really given them an option; either way my general point should've been made pretty well).

The problem with that idea is that Kasich and Rubio represent a Republican Party of the professional class.  In time, candidates like them might appeal to professionals across racial and ethnic lines, but in the end, their base will still really only consist of professionals.  Do you truly want the party to restrict its appeal to this group?  And do you truly believe the party will be able to count on its present foot soldiers forever, particularly if the Democratic Party, at some point, aligns itself to be more Sandersesque, in that it would come to represent the economic interests of the working class more than the professional class?

[RFayette]

Either like Wallace today or like Bryan in the 1940s.  If he loses the nomination and leaves politics for good, he's clearly Wallace.  If he wins the nomination and then loses the general or keeps running again and again into the 2020's, parts of his platform will eventually become mainstream.  If so, will a toned down version of Trump eventually win in a landslide?

This.  The most likely scenario in which this would occur is a Wall Street crash that occurred during a neoliberal Democratic administration (an HRC or say a Cory Booker) - this wouldn't convince people that a return to Reagonomics would be the answer and I could see folks going to someone like Trump in that situation.

[dax00]

The destroyer of an old, corrupt, archaic America predicated on false ideals and the founder of a new America, unburdened with outdated notions of liberty and equality and justice, that boldly bestrode the 21st century like the Colossus.

Amen. A man can dream.

[Lord_Bubbington]

Like Barry Goldwater, a man destroyed and vilified in his own election bid but whose successors accomplish nearly every plank in the platform.

I'm sorry, but when did we overturn the civil rights act and nuke vietnam? I must have missed that class.

[Kingpoleon]

Analogously to George Wallace; a man who made several runs for President representing a dying way of thought, who did shockingly well but ultimately never even came close to the White House and destroyed his health while doing so. (This assumes that he continues running over the next several cycles, even as he enters his 70s).

Trump does not represent a dying way of thought, his ideology is the future of the GOP.

_trump is literally the candidate of places with high mortality rates, and he's consistently done very poorly with young Republican voters (consider that, even as Rubio lost Nevada by 22 points, exit polls still had him winning the under-30 crowd by 6 points; not all states have had exit polling, but you'll find that Rubio won the under-30 vote in Virginia; Cruz won both Carolinas, Arkansas and Missouri among the under-30; _trump also won the under-30 vote in Michigan and Illinois due purely to the strong Kasich performance, and lost the 30-44 vote in both states to Cruz).  It's a way of thinking that is dying out not just figuratively, by people abandoning it, but literally, with those who hold it dying and not getting replaced.

Interestingly enough, the one part of the country where this trend is reversed is New England; Massachusetts is more muddled, but in VT and NH _trump is stronger among the youth and weaker among olds (in VT, Kasich won the over-65 crowd only). However, this is probably due to the unusual circumstance of there still being many Rockefeller Republicans voting in the Republican primary giving an illusory anti-_trump strength to the old; and regardless the region isn't particularly important to the GOP.

Kasich and Rubio encapsulate the future of the GOP far more than _trump does, to wit. (The whole metric is flawed, because as 2008/2012 showed Republican youngs have strong libertarian inclinations and this race hasn't really given them an option; either way my general point should've been made pretty well).

Didn't you say in Trends that Paulism, as a blend of Cruz and Trump, is the GOP's future.