Opinion | The Reason Donald Trump Admires William McKinley
Trump aims to recreate years of Republican supremacy; however, his chances of success appear slim.
TroibNews 
Why has Donald Trump developed a strong admiration for a predecessor that many Americans are unfamiliar with? “President McKinley made our country very rich through tariffs and through talent,” Trump stated in his inaugural address. His interest in McKinley goes beyond the former president's robust trade policies; Trump's ambition to annex Greenland resonates with McKinley’s enthusiasm for expanding the American empire.
Trump's admiration for McKinley also stems from the significant political realignment McKinley initiated, positioning the GOP as the dominant party for decades, a status that was only challenged by the Great Depression.
Between 1896 and 1932, only one president, Woodrow Wilson, was a Democrat, and that was due to a temporary split within the Republican Party. Throughout this period, McKinley’s party typically held the reins of both Congress and most states outside the South. Republicans achieved this by creating a coalition of wealthy business interests and blue-collar workers similar to the one Trump formed in 2024. The critical question is whether Trump can sustain this right-wing majority into the middle of the 21st century and beyond.
There are strong reasons to believe that Trump’s ambitious political aspirations may not materialize, particularly because the current political landscape, both in the United States and within the GOP, is markedly different from McKinley’s era. However, Democrats cannot simply afford to wait for Trump to falter; they must present a convincing alternative that addresses the public’s demand for real change.
The experience of another McKinley supporter with similar ambitions may serve as a cautionary tale for Trump. In George W. Bush’s initial campaign for the presidency, top adviser Karl Rove aimed to replicate the success of Mark Hanna, McKinley’s campaign manager. Rove sought to forge a lasting Republican majority by appealing to demographics that had historically backed Democrats, notably Hispanic and white Catholic voters, all while promoting a version of conservatism that was also deemed "compassionate."
During Bush’s first term, it appeared that Rove was on track to realize this vision. The president’s decisive reaction to the 9/11 attacks helped the GOP secure victories in the midterm elections of 2002 and garnered support for military intervention in Iraq.
However, the mismanagement of the Iraq war and the inadequate response to Hurricane Katrina dealt significant blows to that ambition, and the 2008 recession ultimately shattered it. Suddenly, Barack Obama and the progressive coalition backing him emerged as strong contenders for America's political future. History tends to shift the political landscape and frustrate those who believe they have found a roadmap to victory.
Trump may also face challenges in his quest for a lasting political majority. The nation he leads must deal with rising competition from China and the escalating threat of climate change, a far cry from the prosperous economy during McKinley’s presidency, when the U.S. was the world’s largest economy. In the 1890s, the lure of steady, well-paying jobs attracted waves of immigrants, many settling in industrial cities where the GOP thrived. Furthermore, with a military establishment manageable in size, there was less strain on the federal budget. While Trump presides over a growing economy, it does not resemble the America he envisions bringing back to greatness.
Since McKinley’s time, the GOP fostered a wide-ranging coalition where conservatives and progressives sometimes vied for dominance but remained focused on suppressing Democratic influence. Such ideological flexibility is rare in today’s Republican Party, where questioning a leader who professes to be the sole solution can jeopardize one's political future.
Following McKinley’s assassination in 1901, Theodore Roosevelt maintained the party’s dominance by introducing economic reforms that conservatives resisted. Roosevelt implemented antitrust measures against large corporations, supported labor negotiations, and advocated for income and inheritance taxes. When wealthy Republican benefactors of McKinley expressed dissatisfaction, Roosevelt rebuked them as “malefactors of great wealth” involved in a struggle over who would govern — the people or a few powerful, wealth-driven individuals. One can only speculate at Roosevelt's reaction to a contemporary Republican president who boasts of his wealth and collaborates with the world’s richest individuals to dismantle the federal bureaucracy.
In his tribute to McKinley, Rove claims that McKinley transformed the Republican Party into a vibrant organization united by common beliefs. He describes McKinley as someone who “aimed to unite a divided country.” This sentiment raises questions about whether Trump and his fellow GOP leaders embody such unity.
Some Democrats might find solace in the fact that Trump won the popular vote only once in three elections and that, with a slim majority, the GOP risks losing control of the House within the next two years. In contrast to the clear Republican victories from McKinley’s election in 1896 to Hoover’s in 1928—where they consistently garnered solid majorities and substantial Electoral College victories—today's political climate reflects a near-even split between party affiliations, despite the GOP's current control of both Congress and the presidency.
Nevertheless, it would be unwise for Democrats to solely focus on countering Trump's attacks and wait for the political tide to turn in their favor. Since the late 1960s, working-class Americans have increasingly grown disillusioned with politicians, a sentiment that intensified during the Great Recession of 2008-9. Many now seek transformational leaders like Trump to make the system work for them.
While populist appeals can resonate with voters, they may not always succeed. William Jennings Bryan, who ran against McKinley, criticized the influence of “special interests” and advocated for labor organization, proposing that empowering the masses would result in benefits flowing upward. However, Bryan primarily appealed to a diminishing agrarian voter base, and Democrats had yet to effectively connect with recent immigrants, many of whom sided with the Republicans dominating industrial sectors.
By the 1930s, however, a similar message resonated powerfully among working-class voters across diverse ethnic backgrounds, who attributed the nation’s fracturing and economic woes to Republican leadership. Franklin D. Roosevelt thrived on this sentiment, deriding “economic royalists” and ushering in the New Deal era that brought unprecedented economic equality and lasting Democratic influence. In his 1944 State of the Union address, FDR proposed a “second Bill of Rights” to ensure every adult a job, a livable wage, education, a decent home, and adequate medical care.
Few Democrats today possess the eloquence and empathy that Roosevelt displayed towards disenchanted Americans. However, if they were to develop forward-looking proposals aimed at “promoting the general welfare,” as the Constitution signifies, they could potentially curtail the rise of a Trump-led political era before it truly takes hold.
Camille Lefevre for TROIB News
Trump's admiration for McKinley also stems from the significant political realignment McKinley initiated, positioning the GOP as the dominant party for decades, a status that was only challenged by the Great Depression.
Between 1896 and 1932, only one president, Woodrow Wilson, was a Democrat, and that was due to a temporary split within the Republican Party. Throughout this period, McKinley’s party typically held the reins of both Congress and most states outside the South. Republicans achieved this by creating a coalition of wealthy business interests and blue-collar workers similar to the one Trump formed in 2024. The critical question is whether Trump can sustain this right-wing majority into the middle of the 21st century and beyond.
There are strong reasons to believe that Trump’s ambitious political aspirations may not materialize, particularly because the current political landscape, both in the United States and within the GOP, is markedly different from McKinley’s era. However, Democrats cannot simply afford to wait for Trump to falter; they must present a convincing alternative that addresses the public’s demand for real change.
The experience of another McKinley supporter with similar ambitions may serve as a cautionary tale for Trump. In George W. Bush’s initial campaign for the presidency, top adviser Karl Rove aimed to replicate the success of Mark Hanna, McKinley’s campaign manager. Rove sought to forge a lasting Republican majority by appealing to demographics that had historically backed Democrats, notably Hispanic and white Catholic voters, all while promoting a version of conservatism that was also deemed "compassionate."
During Bush’s first term, it appeared that Rove was on track to realize this vision. The president’s decisive reaction to the 9/11 attacks helped the GOP secure victories in the midterm elections of 2002 and garnered support for military intervention in Iraq.
However, the mismanagement of the Iraq war and the inadequate response to Hurricane Katrina dealt significant blows to that ambition, and the 2008 recession ultimately shattered it. Suddenly, Barack Obama and the progressive coalition backing him emerged as strong contenders for America's political future. History tends to shift the political landscape and frustrate those who believe they have found a roadmap to victory.
Trump may also face challenges in his quest for a lasting political majority. The nation he leads must deal with rising competition from China and the escalating threat of climate change, a far cry from the prosperous economy during McKinley’s presidency, when the U.S. was the world’s largest economy. In the 1890s, the lure of steady, well-paying jobs attracted waves of immigrants, many settling in industrial cities where the GOP thrived. Furthermore, with a military establishment manageable in size, there was less strain on the federal budget. While Trump presides over a growing economy, it does not resemble the America he envisions bringing back to greatness.
Since McKinley’s time, the GOP fostered a wide-ranging coalition where conservatives and progressives sometimes vied for dominance but remained focused on suppressing Democratic influence. Such ideological flexibility is rare in today’s Republican Party, where questioning a leader who professes to be the sole solution can jeopardize one's political future.
Following McKinley’s assassination in 1901, Theodore Roosevelt maintained the party’s dominance by introducing economic reforms that conservatives resisted. Roosevelt implemented antitrust measures against large corporations, supported labor negotiations, and advocated for income and inheritance taxes. When wealthy Republican benefactors of McKinley expressed dissatisfaction, Roosevelt rebuked them as “malefactors of great wealth” involved in a struggle over who would govern — the people or a few powerful, wealth-driven individuals. One can only speculate at Roosevelt's reaction to a contemporary Republican president who boasts of his wealth and collaborates with the world’s richest individuals to dismantle the federal bureaucracy.
In his tribute to McKinley, Rove claims that McKinley transformed the Republican Party into a vibrant organization united by common beliefs. He describes McKinley as someone who “aimed to unite a divided country.” This sentiment raises questions about whether Trump and his fellow GOP leaders embody such unity.
Some Democrats might find solace in the fact that Trump won the popular vote only once in three elections and that, with a slim majority, the GOP risks losing control of the House within the next two years. In contrast to the clear Republican victories from McKinley’s election in 1896 to Hoover’s in 1928—where they consistently garnered solid majorities and substantial Electoral College victories—today's political climate reflects a near-even split between party affiliations, despite the GOP's current control of both Congress and the presidency.
Nevertheless, it would be unwise for Democrats to solely focus on countering Trump's attacks and wait for the political tide to turn in their favor. Since the late 1960s, working-class Americans have increasingly grown disillusioned with politicians, a sentiment that intensified during the Great Recession of 2008-9. Many now seek transformational leaders like Trump to make the system work for them.
While populist appeals can resonate with voters, they may not always succeed. William Jennings Bryan, who ran against McKinley, criticized the influence of “special interests” and advocated for labor organization, proposing that empowering the masses would result in benefits flowing upward. However, Bryan primarily appealed to a diminishing agrarian voter base, and Democrats had yet to effectively connect with recent immigrants, many of whom sided with the Republicans dominating industrial sectors.
By the 1930s, however, a similar message resonated powerfully among working-class voters across diverse ethnic backgrounds, who attributed the nation’s fracturing and economic woes to Republican leadership. Franklin D. Roosevelt thrived on this sentiment, deriding “economic royalists” and ushering in the New Deal era that brought unprecedented economic equality and lasting Democratic influence. In his 1944 State of the Union address, FDR proposed a “second Bill of Rights” to ensure every adult a job, a livable wage, education, a decent home, and adequate medical care.
Few Democrats today possess the eloquence and empathy that Roosevelt displayed towards disenchanted Americans. However, if they were to develop forward-looking proposals aimed at “promoting the general welfare,” as the Constitution signifies, they could potentially curtail the rise of a Trump-led political era before it truly takes hold.
Camille Lefevre for TROIB News
