Dozens, if not hundreds, of books have been written about the 2016 campaign. Finding truly objective ones among them is very difficult. On one hand, there is a book by Trump's friend Newt Gingrich, who relatively neutrally described his path to success, analyzing the reasons for victories, as well as describing the political landscape and context in which the 2016 elections took place. However, scandals and criticism are given much less attention in the work. This is understandable, as the book is titled "Understanding Trump."

On the other hand, there is Mary L. Trump, the niece and daughter of Donald's deceased brother. Her book "Too Much and Never Enough" is 100% negative. The niece, focusing on the president's psychological state, describes family dinners, secret conversations, and the "skeletons in the closet" of the Trump clan with such ferocity that it becomes very difficult to read. But as is known, the truth is somewhere in the middle, so both sides must be considered.

Creating a Revolution

"I was not satisfied with just making a good living. I wanted to make a statement."

Donald Trump

Looking at the photo above, you want to exclaim: "This was already in The Simpsons!", but not quite. Indeed, there is a popular myth that "The Simpsons predicted everything long ago." However, the eerily similar episode about President Trump was aired only after the announcement of his candidacy.

Just a day after his 69th birthday, Trump decided to run for the presidency of the United States. First, he had to go through the primaries — the internal elections of the Republican Party, and only then face the final boss in the form of Hillary Clinton from the Democratic Party. To better understand the atmosphere of that time, let's recall the end of Barack Obama's term, who was president from 2009 to 2017.

Obama was not just elected under the slogan “Hope” — he embodied it. Not only for the Democratic Party but for the American people as a whole. The election of a black president, who built a successful legal career and then represented the interests of citizens first in the Illinois State Senate and then in the U.S. Senate, seemed to forever end the dark legacy of the U.S. in the form of segregation of African Americans and the restriction of their rights.

The youth of the politician was also appealing: in 2008, Obama was only 47 years old. Before him, the youngest president was John Kennedy, elected at 43. There was also 42-year-old Theodore Roosevelt, but he took office after the assassination of President William McKinley, not as a result of winning an election. The average age of American presidents at the time of their election is 55 years.

Obama was elected on a moderately progressive (left-liberal) agenda: healthcare reform, along with a rejection of an all-powerful government, foreign wars, and special operations. He was perceived as a liberal politician of a new generation, who would set the trend for how global leaders speak and behave. For example, Obama in many ways became a model for Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

It cannot be said that the Democrat intended to represent only the "blue" states. One of his most popular speeches of 2004 was built on the idea that there are neither liberal nor conservative states, but only the United States of America. Agree, it's appealing?

And it appealed to the American voter. Obama overwhelmingly defeated Republican John McCain, receiving 365 electoral votes out of the necessary 270 for victory and 52.9% of the popular vote. His opponent received 173 electoral votes and 45.7% of the vote. The situation in the 2012 elections was slightly worse, but Obama still received 332 electoral votes against Mitt Romney's 206, or 51.1% against 47.2%.

Obama's average support level throughout both terms was 48%. The peak was reached in 2009 — almost 70%. It seemed the numbers were high, the support was excellent, but the end of the term left America disappointed. The radical system overhaul hoped for by the left did not occur. Nor was it possible to contain the growth of the Republican Party: since 2010, the House of Representatives was under the control of the president's opponents. Not all reforms were implemented, which demoralized the Democratic electorate.

Moreover, Obama's period was marked by many challenges: the aftermath of the 2008 crisis, the scandal of eavesdropping on private messages of Americans revealed by Edward Snowden, the use of combat drones during military operations, mass deportations of illegal migrants (more than under Trump in his first term). The healthcare reform " Obamacare" did not cover the entire population. At the same time, the rhetoric of "diversity" — in reality, division by skin color and gender — began to grow. Simultaneously, the woke movement became more active, supported by both the Democratic Party and the government. Polarization and conflict grew in society. By 2016, the country was disappointed, lost, and unsure of what to do next.

Trump was able to respond to this demand. In the first part of our review, we focused on Trump's initial attempts to transition from businessman to politician. The main conclusion he made then was that the US was not ready for a politician-entrepreneur who would oppose the sprawling state apparatus. In previous decades, this issue was not as acute, but after the Snowden scandal, the topic of the "deep state" became increasingly pressing. During Obama's two progressive terms, a whole layer of voters formed who self-isolated from politics. Later, Trump would call them the "Silent Majority."

During his campaign speech, Trump used a slogan familiar from Ronald Reagan's campaign — "Make America Great Again (MAGA)". The businessman insisted that he would finance his campaign himself and would not turn to large donors for help. He focused on the issues of Islamic terrorism, uncontrolled migration, national debt, and economic problems. Trump's speech attracted enormous media attention, but he was not yet considered a serious contender. Brokers believed his chances of winning were 1 in 150, calling it an unlikely outcome.

Before the 2016 campaign, Trump was a media darling, friends with Democrats, and even maintained good relations with the Clintons. He was invited to liberal platforms, and Whoopi Goldberg, who would later become his main critic on TV, laughed with him on the show "The View". In short, Trump was a well-liked guy on TV who knew how to get along with everyone. This era ended instantly after he entered the presidential race on the Republican side. Newt Gingrich writes well about this:

"He thought he would win the election, and everyone would rally around him, even the left would support him for the good of America, but I told him that wouldn't happen."

Trump immediately felt the intense and negative media attention, which he would later call "Fake News". The primaries awaited the candidate, so there was no time to waste. Already experienced in talk shows and public speaking, he built his campaign on two pillars: the "Orchestra Pit Theory" and the "Day of Thunder." The first was devised by the man who created modern "Fox News" — Roger Ailes. He claimed that the media are only interested in three things — beautiful pictures, attacks, and mistakes. If during a debate one candidate proposes a solution to the Middle East conflict, and the second falls into the orchestra pit, all the media write only about the second event.

The author of "Day of Thunder" was Trump's strategic advisor and one of the leaders of his 2016 campaign, national-populist Stephen Bannon. They have since parted ways and no longer communicate, but back then Bannon helped build Trump's communication strategy. "Day of Thunder" is when such a huge number of news stories come from one source that the media simply cannot keep up with and comment on all of them. This strategy of forcing attention on the loudest topics and dispersing focus from unfavorable topics helped Trump work effectively with the media. In addition, the candidate skillfully used the media's dislike of him, "feeding" them sensational headlines.

A vivid example was the promise to build a wall on the border with Mexico to reduce the number of illegal migrants. When Trump announced this intention, he criticized the quality of migrants from Mexico and, listing the "bad people" from there, made the statement "They are rapists." Formally, he was speaking specifically about illegal migrants who enter the country and do not go through the standard procedure, but most of the "legacy media" (traditional media) accused him of racism, and the speech was interpreted as an attack on Mexicans. But Trump only benefited from this.

The reason for such a PR strategy is simple. In elections, there is a conversion funnel from a citizen who doesn't know you to your voter. The more they talk about you, the more your recognition grows. It then converts into a rating and anti-rating, so more well-known candidates often win elections because people prefer to vote for someone they have formed an opinion about.

Using this strategy, Trump approached the Republican Party primaries, where he faced very strong players and made his first enemies within the conservative movement.

From Outsider to Leader

"The main difference between me and the other candidates is that I am more honest, and my women are more beautiful."

Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign

The political elite of both parties did not believe that Trump was serious about winning and suspected that he simply wanted to solve financial problems through the presidential campaign. Despite having more than $1.4 billion in capital, Trump had over $250 million in debt. Trump's critics believed he was trying to boost his recognition to sell another book or launch a new TV show.

There is more truth to this version than it seems. Trump ran in 2016 "on a whim," not aiming for victory. In a podcast with Joe Rogan in 2024, he described in detail his emotions when he first found himself in the White House bedroom as president. He and his wife Melania could not believe the reality of what was happening, that they would sleep where Abraham Lincoln once slept. Trump had no team; he was looking for future administration members through his acquaintances and golf friends. He had no clear strategy, blueprint — a plan of action. Yes, Trump's ideological platform helped him win, but no specific bills or first steps were developed. All this tells us that Trump really did not expect to win.

Despite this, being a party outsider, he quickly became a leader in the polls and entered the TOP-2 most promising candidates. His main rival seemed to be Jeb Bush — the son of one president and the younger brother of another. A representative of the second most famous surname among Republicans after Reagan, Bush announced the start of his campaign a day before Trump, but he already had the support of a Super PAC with a budget of $100 million.

Super PAC — an electoral fund in support of a candidate that is not officially connected with him, does not report to him, and does not coordinate its actions and strategy. At least officially.

Another prominent opponent of Trump was Marco Rubio. Today he is the head of the State Department, a member of Trump's team. But in 2016, he was one of his fiercest opponents. Cuban Rubio was a senator from Florida, capable of attracting Latino voters to the Republican Party and pulling them away from the Democrats.

The third serious opponent was Texas Senator Ted Cruz. In fact, he became Trump's main opponent, not Jeb Bush. Representing Texas, the main Republican stronghold, he was the only one to provide worthy competition to Trump. Their positions were very similar, especially on illegal immigration and the current state of affairs in the USA, but their solutions differed slightly.

To better understand how the candidates' debates went, just watch the video. Trump resorted to personal attacks, giving his opponents insulting nicknames. For example, he called Jeb Bush “Low Energy Jeb” because compared to Trump, he appeared indifferent and tired. Trump called Ted Cruz a liar and Marco Rubio a baby.

With each new round of public debate, Trump became more popular and felt more confident. His first major victory was pushing Jeb Bush out of the race. During a verbal skirmish, the audience booed Trump, but he didn't falter and delivered a speech that made him the ultimate favorite of the campaign. Discussing the difference between him and Bush, he called the latter a puppet, a talking head of "special interests" and lobbyists. Trump accused the party establishment of wasting 15 years in the Middle East, leaving chaos and destruction, and promised to resolve the issue once and for all.

This approach to public rhetoric marked Trump as the new party leader, although not everyone agreed with it. In the US primaries, there is an unwritten rule — be radical in the primaries and moderate in the general election. Trump used this advice well, as his political consultant was Roger Stone, who invented this rule. At the same time, in elections, it is very important to differentiate yourself from your opponent, not only with your theses but also emotionally, visually, and substantively. Compared to Trump, all the candidates, despite different positions and backgrounds, looked the same. They all united in a common impulse against him, which Trump skillfully used. Whoever gets more attention boosts their recognition and improves their rating.

The strategy worked, Trump won the primaries and received almost 45% of the votes. The closest opponent, Ted Cruz, got 25.1%. Trump received 14 million votes, while Cruz got almost 8 million. Meanwhile, Hillary surpassed all opponents in the Democratic Party primaries and received the nomination. Trump and Clinton began preparing for their first debates against each other.

The Battle of Two Negative Ratings

“I will be the greatest president ever created by God.”

Donald Trump

Everyone, absolutely everyone, believed that Clinton — former First Lady under President Bill Clinton, former Senator from New York, and Secretary of State under Obama — would defeat Trump. Polling services, experts, and political analysts predicted her victory. Everyone, except for two — “Trafalgar Group” and political analyst Allan Lichtman. Among the reasons they cited for Donald Trump's victory were the following:

• Higher negative rating of Hillary;

• The email and classified documents scandal of Clinton;

• High refusal rate of respondents to answer questions about Trump (the so-called “Silent Majority”).

Polls were wrong in predicting Clinton's victory. In 2016, American sociology entered a prolonged crisis, which continues today. For the Russian reader, the easiest way to explain the reasons for this mistake is through the familiar example of Vladimir Volfovich Zhirinovsky. According to various polls, his electorate in the last years of his life ranged from 5 to 7%, but in elections, his party could receive more, although polls always gave lower figures. The reason is the “Zhirinovsky Effect.” Voters were embarrassed, and sometimes even afraid, to admit they supported VVZh. Social stigma pressured them, so they preferred to name another candidate or not answer sociologists' questions at all.

This is exactly what happened with Trump. Admitting that you want to vote for a showman and businessman for president, especially one so bright, controversial, and emotional, is a risky business! The silent majority enjoyed Trump's rhetoric but seemed embarrassed to declare it publicly.

An important role was also played by the Green Party candidate — Jill Stein. A white woman with a higher education, who built her campaign platform on liberal and progressive theses, received 1% and became a spoiler for Clinton.

Hillary stood on positions similar to Obama's: raising the minimum wage, equalizing the pay gap between men and women, raising taxes on the wealthy, strengthening union rights, expanding “Obamacare”, introducing free education in public colleges for low-income families, restricting the circulation of weapons, adhering to the Paris climate agreements, and limiting mass deportations.

The result was exactly the opposite. Trump received 306 electors, and Hillary 232.

The 2016 elections became not only a battle of two negative ratings but also a war of compromising materials. In the summer of 2016, the site "WikiLeaks" published emails from the Democratic National Committee, which cast doubt on the fairness of the primaries concerning Bernie Sanders.  U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that the attacks were organized by Russian hackers to support Trump.

Clinton commissioned an investigation from former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to prove the "Russian trace." The entire ensuing scandal was named "Russiagate." Steele compiled a very dubious dossier but found no evidence of Trump's ties to the Kremlin. This did not prevent the FBI from starting surveillance of the Republican headquarters and installing wiretaps. In the end, no "Russian trace" was found, but the media picked up on this topic and began accusing Trump of being compromised.

Another scandal occurred with Clinton. While she was Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013, she used a personal email server located at her home instead of an official government account. Through this private server, she sent and received official correspondence, including classified information on international policy and national security issues.

The use of a personal server violated the State Department's internal security and information storage instructions and could have led to a leak. The case was conducted from 2015, but in July 2016 it was closed with the words:

"Hillary Clinton and her staff were extremely careless, but there are no grounds for a criminal case."

Republicans used these words in attack propaganda against Hillary throughout the campaign. Eleven days before the election, on October 28, the case was reopened due to new data found on the laptop of the former Secretary of State's aide's husband. Two days before the election, the case was closed again, but the scandal significantly affected Clinton's chances of becoming the next President of the United States.

During the debates, Trump promised to send Hillary to jail. Overall, he performed very organically, contrasting his business approach with the governmental constraint thinking of his opponent. However, the numbers showed a completely different picture.

The Echelon Insights poll showed that Clinton won the debates with a score of 48 to 22, and the debates increased the likelihood that 41% of respondents would vote for Clinton, while only 29% would vote for Trump. The Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that 56% of Americans considered Clinton the winner of the debates, while only 26% gave the victory to Trump.

However, the actual election result was the exact opposite. Trump received 306 electoral votes, and Hillary 232. Despite the controversial debate results, "Russiagate," and unfavorable poll results, Trump won the election. Without a plan, without a team, but with a huge will and desire to be the best in his field. He may not have had clear goals for his presidential term, but he had the desire to revolutionize American politics. And he achieved this by using ideas from his campaigns in the 80s and 90s.