He should’ve stuck with “ridiculous.” That was the word President Trump used in late April to describe the “first 100 days” standard by which new commanders in chief are judged for their productivity. Trump himself cited the timeline before the election in his Contract with the American Voter, a “100-day action plan to Make America Great Again”—as realistic as a one-day push to build Rome. He’s learned since that legislating is a slog and externalities like foreign affairs and Congress’s Russia probe don’t politely yield to a domestic policy wish list. Acknowledging as much—”No matter how much I accomplish during the ridiculous standard of the first 100 days . . . media will kill!” he complained on day 92—wouldn’t have been hypocrisy. It would’ve demonstrated a realization that there’s only one FDR, who set the 100-day benchmark during the hyperactive first months of his administration. Nothing since has prompted a desperate rush of lawmaking quite like the Great Depression did. Not even American carnage.
But as day 100 (April 29) approached, the White House made it seem that far from being a ridiculous cliché, the milestone was a sensitive point of pride. In response to Democratic and media criticism that Trump has underwhelmed to this point, WhiteHouse.gov launched an image- and video-heavy “President Trump’s First 100 Days” webpage to highlight his accomplishments. The Republican National Committee began using the term in its releases: The April 24 subject line was “U.S. Economy Booms Under President Trump in the First 100 Days.” On April 25: “RNC Releases New Video: ‘100 Days of Obstruction,’ ” referring to Democrats. On April 26: “President Trump’s 100 Days of Streamlining Government.” In the offing, perhaps: “100 Days of Emails About 100 Days.”
A question for day 101: What is the significance of the first three months and a week, not just for Trump, but for any president? Conventional wisdom says a new administration’s audience is most captive during the presidency’s opening act. Washington is supposedly energized from the results of the campaign: The White House has its mandate from the public and a pile of “political capital” to spend, and Congress is not yet bogged down in discord. Never mind that the winning president has received more than 55 percent of the popular vote only four times since 1940 and the coequal branches of government resemble a sibling rivalry more than a partnership.
What’s more, the beginning of a presidency is not necessarily predictive. The Atlantic‘s David A. Graham compared the early troubles of President Clinton with those of President Trump, describing both with the same passage: “Reports of chaos, confusion, and infighting seem to leak out of the West Wing on a daily basis. The president is his own worst enemy, easily distracted, obsessed with minutiae, and uninterested in instilling much order in his administration.” There are more substantive similarities, too. Clinton spent 1993 rolling out a “new Democrat” platform; Trump is trying to make over the Republican party in his image. Clinton was hampered by a disastrous budget rollout. For Trump, it’s been health care. Neither administration had a healthy relationship with the press. Both suffered from awful polling—in June 1993, Clinton’s approval rating was in the high 30s, according to Gallup. Yet he was reelected, and he polled in the 60s throughout his second term.
Consequential legislation passed in the first 100 days frequently signifies crisis, not achievement. See FDR and the dozens of economic bills Congress approved in 1933. See President Obama and the stimulus. Trump has touted his intention to reform the nation’s health care and tax systems: monumental undertakings that can define a presidency. Obama didn’t get the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed until day 428. President Reagan didn’t get tax reform until day 641—of his second term.
Thus far, President Trump has appointed a highly impressive justice to the Supreme Court, assertively reoriented America’s posture toward foreign adversaries, followed through on immigration policy about as much as he can from his office, begun to undo President Obama’s regulatory legacy, and set sail into the high seas of health care reform. He’s punted on some pledges, like declaring China a currency manipulator and renegotiating NAFTA. According to the Washington Post, Trump hasn’t even started on the majority of his 60 “Contract” promises. Perhaps that’s a failure. But knowing how quickly things can change, we suspect anyone looking back at the list will conclude it was ridiculous to care.
The 100-day standard doesn’t have implications beyond a disposable news cycle. Most political analysts these days contemplate history 15 minutes at a time. Not a single voter will go to the polls on day 1,384 of the Trump administration and pull the lever for the other guy because Trump didn’t come through 1,284 days before. Only if he didn’t come through in the days thereafter, either.
