It was an emphatic victory for Trump, with no room for doubt whatsoever. The 2024 elections were Trump’s from the beginning. With Biden’s declining cognitive health and his refusal to give up his race for a second term, the Republican party was cruising to victory without having to do much. It was the Presidential debate in July that changed the complexion of this election. After Biden’s lackluster performance on the podium, it was clear that if the Democratic party had any fighting chance in this election, Biden must step down. He eventually did, and he quickly endorsed Kamala Harris, his Vice President, to carry the baton. In hindsight, it may have helped if Biden could have stepped down much earlier or, better still, never stood for re-election. The moment Kamala entered the race, the entire Democratic party machinery embraced Kamala’s candidacy and began one of the most exciting campaigns in American history. Kamala had only about three months to win the popular vote, piggybacking on Biden’s legacy and carving her path. She had to introduce herself afresh to the American people, which is unfortunate because, as Vice President, her term wasn’t effective at all. Americans hadn’t seen much of her or her actions. It was always going to be an arduous task for Kamala, but just for a few weeks after her nomination, it looked as though the electoral tides had changed direction and flowed the way of the Democratic party. That proved to be a chimera, a passing swell, nothing more.
The Trump campaign knew they had this election in their hands, no matter how much Kamala tried to wean it away from them. Americans wanted someone strong and affirmative, someone who would put America first. For Trump to win, he had to remain Trump—his direct, unconventional, unrestrained, super-confident, decisive self. Despite Kamala’s appeal to brotherhood, compassion, equality, and women’s rights, it was Trump’s unabashed rhetoric of American greatness and solutions to America’s local issues that resonated with people. Trump may be dubbed a narcissist, a misogynist, a convicted criminal, and called a thousand other names, but none of that mattered or made a sliver of difference. Trump had America’s vote, and in large numbers. The American people believed in his vision for their country and his diagnosis of its problems. You need the popular vote to win elections, and Trumpism touched the right chords among his people to give him the votes he needed. That is how one wins elections.
Trump believes that his vision is the right one for the country. He may be wrong in some cases and right in others; it doesn’t matter; he does what he believes is the right thing to do. It takes some time to get used to a person like Trump. That is what happened in his first term. He was a different President, totally unconventional. His brand of presidency is fiery and full of flourishing and quick decisions. People may feel that he is crazy; all that is part of power. Every powerful man and woman is crazy in their own way. When Alexander decided to go east, the whole of Greece looked at him in puzzlement. When Caesar traveled to Egypt and married Cleopatra and had the audacity to invite her to Rome, Romans cringed, but Caesar couldn’t care less. Both men met a cruel fate but did not diminish what they achieved. However, in the process, they ended up redefining the contours of human civilization. Yes, it is true that Trump inherited a rich legacy, has never known what it is to earn a living, he is unscrupulous in business and thinks less of morality than getting things done, he looks at issues in terms of winning or losing a deal, he understands governing a country as a balance sheet with assets one side and liabilities on the other. Trump doesn’t pretend to be anything other than what he is. That is a good trait in a leader.
Recently, I have been re-reading Ayn Rand after 30 years, hoping to see how her ideas resonate with current times, particularly in the context of Trump. I read Rand, as many do, as a young man entering college, drawn by her forceful vindication of individualism and self-reliance. Rand’s novels, “The Fountainhead” and “Atlas Shrugged,” were iconoclastic and appealing at that time for their advocacy of individualism.
Reading her now, I see her work through a different lens, and I realize that much of her philosophy is personified in Trump. For instance, Trump’s message to “Make America Great Again” reflects Rand’s emphasis on self-reliance and individual vision. Like Rand’s heroes, such as Howard Roark in “The Fountainhead,” Trump positions himself as a lone visionary capable of achieving greatness against a backdrop of collective mediocrity. He projects himself as a man who refuses to conform, mirroring Rand’s protagonists, who embody exceptional abilities, disdain societal norms, and prefer to chart their own paths, sometimes at the cost of standing alone against society.
Trump’s rejection of traditional altruism (the need to be selfless) also aligns with Rand’s critique of the morality of sacrifice. Rand argued that altruism, which prioritizes others’ needs over one’s own, ultimately hinders human progress by discouraging individual ambition and self-fulfillment. Trump’s rhetoric of putting “America First” focuses on competition rather than global cooperation—on the good of America versus the good of the world—resonating with how Rand might have viewed America’s position.
Lastly, Trump’s embrace of wealth parallels Rand’s ideal of the heroic capitalist. Trump’s opulence, from his sprawling villas and Trump Towers to his billionaire persona, echoes Rand’s belief that wealth symbolizes individual achievement in modern society. In “Atlas Shrugged,” Rand’s protagonist, John Galt, represents the productive elite who refuse to let the weak dictate their success. Similarly, Trump portrays himself as a relentless businessman who values strength and economic might above all.
However, there are dissonances between Rand’s views and Trump’s. Rand modeled her philosophy and characters around individuals and innovators who demonstrated intellectual prowess and extraordinary creativity. It is arguable whether Trump possesses the kind of creativity that Rand celebrates. Moreover, Rand’s heroes adhered to strict rational integrity, whereas Trump’s impulsive behavior often contradicts the rationalist core of Rand’s Objectivism.
Kamala Harris did well in the short time she had. There is no shame or embarrassment in this loss. Her rise to this stature from humble beginnings is a story that is typically American in nature. Politically, Kamala is still young, and in the last three months, she must have had what we call “baptism by fire.” From the time her name was floated as the presumptive nominee for the Democratic candidate, she hit the ground running with no time to pause, rethink her strategy, or even fully flesh out her own position on key economic and social issues, especially immigration and inflation—which hurt America the most. Every day, she had to stand before thousands of people and introduce herself, unlike Trump, who is part of the American psyche as JFK is.
Her campaign was a labor of Sisyphus: she would do well one day, and the next day, a stray comment, a detail about her past, or an unanswered question would push her back a few rungs down the ladder. She really didn’t have the constant tailwind required in such fiercely fought campaigns. But she did well in a short span of time. I read yesterday that senior Democrats are shifting the blame onto Biden for holding on too long and that he should have stepped down much earlier. There is merit in this reasoning. The Biden years didn’t bring about much change in the texture of America. And the man himself couldn’t project himself as the confident leader of the Free World that Americans expected him to be. Not his fault either. He is neither a Kennedy nor an Obama, who could sway people through their rhetoric, nor a Lyndon Johnson capable of making radical changes. Biden’s path to power has been long, slow, and steady. Fifty years of political life can take its toll, and it certainly showed in Biden’s diminishing powers over the last four years. Never coherent, even at the best of times, his ability to hold on to a train of thought or give life to his thoughts went downhill during his presidency. Biden will be remembered in history as a good and decent man who gave his entire career to the service of America; as a President, he wasn’t effective enough to make a difference.
We look forward to Donald Trump’s second term. I am a firm believer that one’s past is not always an indicator of the future. People change. Trump’s first term was noisy and choppy. Could it have been better? Yes! But that does not mean his second term will continue where he left off in 2020. Time, age, and mortality change people and perspectives. Trump knows that this is his last term. In all likelihood, Republicans will run both houses of the government. This should give Trump the means to set America’s agenda and reset some of the policies of the past. Trump is an experienced businessman who knows that America cannot thrive in isolation. At the same time, America cannot retain its stamp of individuality or greatness without protecting its core interests. It’s a double-edged sword, and he will have to wield it well. His message of “Make America Great Again” shouldn’t be construed as a threat but as an opportunity for this great country to establish itself as the land of dreams, a land of milk and honey. No leader can satisfy everyone. It is true that Trump will attempt to dismantle institutions that currently benefit millions of people, and he could restructure policies that could hurt many in the short run. All this may happen. But good can come out of this change, too, and that is hope for a very new era in a nation’s history.
In sum, Trump’s return to power signals a reinvigoration of a political philosophy centered on strength, individualism, and an unapologetic prioritization of American interests. His rise reflects a general trend in politics today and the enduring appeal of a vision rooted in personal conviction and nationalistic fervor, resonant with many within the country yet divisive to others. As Trump steps into his second term, he has the opportunity to reshape it. His presidency will most certainly be a test of America’s resilience, both in maintaining democratic institutions and in navigating the consequences of policies that may emphasize unilateral benefit over global cooperation. Ultimately, Trump’s tenure will serve as an answer to the essential question: What does it indeed mean to make America great?
The answer lies ahead…