Trump is doing a great job. What's the risk? The Venezuela Effect

February 26, 2025

Is Trump doing a great job so far? Yes, he is. The risk is that populist success may lead to failure once the populist leader is gone (dies or gets ill).

Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll Findings:

Approval Rating: A survey conducted on February 19–20, 2025, indicates that President Trump holds a 52% approval rating, with 33% of respondents strongly approving and 19% somewhat approving of his performance. Conversely, 43% disapprove, and 5% remain undecided.
Policy Support: The poll reveals substantial backing for specific policies:
- 81% support the deportation of illegal immigrants who have committed crimes.
- 76% favor efforts to identify and eliminate fraud and waste in government.
- 69% endorse policies preventing individuals born male from competing in women's sports.

Partisan Perspectives:

Republican Support: Approximately 90% of Republican respondents approve of President Trump's performance.
Democratic Opposition: Nearly 80% of Democrats disapprove of his job performance.
Independents: Opinions among independent voters are more divided, reflecting a near-even 50/50 split in approval and disapproval.

Public Sentiment and Economic Concerns:

"Eggconomic" Challenges: Despite policy support, there is growing public dissatisfaction regarding economic issues, particularly inflation and rising living costs such as the insane prices of eggs in the United States. Some reports indicate that Trump's inability to achieve some of his economic prices such as taming food price inflation is contributing to ending the honeymoon approval period and beginning a gradual decline in overall support. The firing of so many government workers and federal spending cuts may lead to a domino effect that increases unemployment and decreases economic activity nationwide leading to less support for the president.

President Trump maintains a solid base of support, especially among Republican voters. However, high approval ratings for specific policies may contrast with concerns over economic management and administrative decisions, suggesting that public sentiment is multifaceted and subject to change in a heartbeat if the Trump administration cannot contain inflation.

So if Trump is so popular and doing relatively well, what's the risk to the United States?

Well, the risk may be that Donald Trump may be the American version of the late Hugo Chavez. If Americans are not mindful about learning from history, they may make the same mistakes that Venezuelans did in empowering Hugo Chavez.

Trump and Chávez: Two Sides of the Same Populist Coin

Populism has long been a force in global politics, shaping nations in dramatically different ways. While Donald Trump and the late Hugo Chávez are often seen as ideological opposites—Trump representing right-wing nationalism and Chávez embodying leftist socialism—they share key characteristics that define populist leaders. Both men rose to power by tapping into popular grievances, attacking traditional elites, and consolidating authority in ways that reshaped their respective democracies.

The danger for the United States lies not in Trump himself but in the precedent he is setting, just as Chávez did in Venezuela. If populism continues unchecked, it could lead to constitutional changes, an excessive accumulation of power in the presidency, and an eventual leadership crisis when a weaker successor inherits this unchecked authority—a fate Venezuela has already suffered.

1. Populist Leadership: The Common Threads Between Trump and Chávez

Though Trump and Chávez occupied opposite ends of the political spectrum, they shared core populist strategies that define their political playbooks.

Attack on Elites and Institutions:
- Chávez railed against Venezuelan oligarchs, the United States, and international organizations like the IMF, blaming them for economic inequality and corruption.
- Trump attacked the mainstream media, the Democratic establishment, and federal agencies, portraying them as part of a "deep state" working against the people.
Direct Connection with the People:
- Chávez used "Aló Presidente," a weekly TV show, to communicate directly with Venezuelans, bypassing traditional media.
- Trump relied on social media, particularly Twitter and Truth Social, to maintain an unfiltered connection with his supporters.
Disregard for Democratic Norms:
- Chávez rewrote the Venezuelan constitution, weakened independent institutions, and used state resources to stay in power.
- Trump has openly suggested expanding presidential powers, questioned the legitimacy of elections, and floated ideas about prosecuting political opponents. Trump also promised that there will not be more elections in the United States. The people still voted for him.

Despite these similarities, Chávez succeeded in permanently altering Venezuela’s system, while Trump has yet to do the same in the United States. However, if Trump pushes for significant constitutional changes, which is super likely, the U.S. could face a similar fate.

2. The Danger of Permanent Constitutional Changes

One of Chávez’s most consequential actions was rewriting the Venezuelan constitution to give himself more power. He introduced constitutional amendments that:

Extended presidential terms.
Allowed indefinite re-election.
Weakened checks and balances in government.

Over time, these changes made democracy in Venezuela a façade, where elections still occurred but were structurally tilted in favor of Chávez and his party.

Trump, while not having made yet formal constitutional changes, has laid the groundwork for a more powerful presidency by:

Expanding the use of executive orders to bypass Congress.
Encouraging the idea that a U.S. president should have "absolute immunity" from prosecution.
Calling for the "termination" of parts of the U.S. Constitution if they interfere with his agenda.

If a future populist leader (whether Trump or someone after him) successfully alters constitutional norms to concentrate power, the U.S. could experience a similar democratic backsliding.

3. The Succession Problem: When the Leader is Gone, Who Takes Over?

One of the greatest dangers of excessive presidential power is that when the populist leader leaves or dies, an unqualified successor may inherit all the unchecked authority that the people granted to the previous leader. This was precisely what happened in Venezuela.

Chávez’s Death and Maduro’s Rise
Chávez was a charismatic and politically skilled leader, but when he died in 2013, his successor, Nicolás Maduro, proved to be far less competent.
- Maduro lacked Chávez’s political instincts and economic knowledge.
- He inherited an authoritarian system, which he used to brutally suppress dissent and preside over Venezuela’s economic collapse.
- The same unchecked powers granted to Chávez—which were initially seen as "necessary"—became tools of oppression under his successor.
The U.S. Parallel: What Happens After Trump?
If Trump expands presidential power and weakens U.S. democratic institutions, the long-term consequences may not emerge during his own presidency, but rather under a future leader who lacks Trump's political skills.
- Just as Chávez built a system that Maduro later exploited, a powerful presidency with minimal checks could eventually be abused by an even less competent or more authoritarian successor.
- Historical examples, from monarchies to dictatorships, show that strongmen can sometimes be effective, but their successors often fail spectacularly.

4. The Danger of Populist Entitlement to Power

Both Chávez and Trump cultivated a sense that they alone represent the will of the people. This belief leads to the idea that if they lose an election, the system itself must be fraudulent.

Chávez’s Strategy:
- Weakened electoral institutions to ensure he and his party always won.
- Discredited political opponents as "enemies of the people" rather than legitimate competitors.
Trump’s Strategy:
- Challenged the legitimacy of U.S. elections, refusing to accept results he disagreed with.
- Encouraged efforts to overturn the 2020 election and proposed federal takeovers of state-run election processes.

Once populists convince their followers that only they can represent the nation, it opens the door to systemic election tampering and authoritarian rule. In Venezuela, this transition happened gradually, with small institutional changes leading to the eventual dismantling of democratic governance. The U.S. must avoid a similar slow erosion of democratic norms.

5. The United States Still Has Guardrails—For Now

Unlike Venezuela, the U.S. has stronger institutions, a longer democratic tradition, and a decentralized political system that makes it harder for any one leader to consolidate total control. However, these guardrails are not indestructible.

Congress, the courts, and state governments remain major obstacles to excessive presidential power—but only as long as they resist authoritarian impulses.
Media independence and public dissent still serve as checks—but populists often seek to discredit or weaken these forces over time.
The U.S. Constitution is more difficult to amend—but norms and legal precedents can still be gradually eroded.

America is not Venezuela, but the process of democratic decline follows a similar pattern worldwide. If Trump or a future leader succeeds in undermining democratic institutions, the U.S. could increasingly resemble the Venezuelan model of one-man rule.

Conclusion: Learning from Venezuela’s Mistakes

The United States faces a historic test: Can it prevent populism from undermining its democratic institutions? While Trump and Chávez came from opposite ends of the political spectrum, their populist playbooks were strikingly similar. The greatest danger is not necessarily Trump himself, but what happens after him if executive power becomes unchecked. Venezuela’s experience serves as a warning: a nation that once prided itself on democracy can slide into authoritarianism, not in one dramatic event, but through gradual and seemingly "necessary" changes. If the U.S. does not learn from this history, it risks repeating it. American ego will accept the comparison with Venezuela, which increases the risk of not learning from its mistakes.

Now you know it.

Creatix Blogger

Search This Blog