Summary of Three More Years

Overview of Three More Years

This Dispatch Podcast roundtable (host Steve Hayes, with Jonah Goldberg, David French, Mike Warren and Sarah Isger) marks one year into Donald Trump’s second presidential term. The conversation surveys what unfolded in year one, what surprised the panel, which changes are likely to outlast his presidency, foreign-policy consequences, the dynamics that make the administration more or less chaotic, when Trump might become a meaningful lame duck, and a lighter — but pointed — behind-the-scenes dispute about the podcast’s “Not Worth Your Time” segment.

Key takeaways

• The second Trump term is bolder and more consolidated than the first: loyalists surround the president and execute his vision more effectively.
• Much of Trump’s agenda has been executed by executive action rather than statute, making many policy moves reversible — but the reputational and strategic damage abroad and domestic institutional changes may be longer-lasting.
• Trump has been unexpectedly effective on immigration/interior enforcement; this was credited largely to Stephen Miller-style policy execution.
• Internal administration cohesion (credited to Susie Wiles) has reduced intra-administration chaos even as external chaos continues.
• Markets, bond markets and public opinion still function as meaningful checks on some administration policies (e.g., tariffs).
• The biggest durable effects are likely to be political and strategic (norm erosion, allied mistrust, shifting party dynamics), not statutory policy permanence.

What surprised the panel

• Jonah Goldberg: Trump’s increased brazenness and effectiveness on immigration; under-estimated ability to enforce the border and deport at scale (more effective than Goldberg expected).
• David French: The administration has been as chaotic as expected but in unexpected ways (e.g., the Greenland flap). He noted the administration squandered political gains by letting public retribution and chaos overshadow accomplishments.
• Sarah Isger: Surprised by the lack of legislative engagement (few statutory initiatives, little work with Congress or judiciary confirmations). Also surprised by how unified and internally disciplined the administration is compared to the first term.
• Mike Warren: Surprised by the resilience and corrective influence of market forces (financial markets, bond markets, public reaction) which have moderated some of the administration’s policy impulses.
• Across the panel: higher-than-expected levels of politicization/corruption and stronger internal execution than anticipated.

Which changes are likely to last (policy vs. norms)

• Reversible/shorter-lived:
  • Executive orders and many administrative actions — easily reversed by a subsequent president.
  • Public-facing renamings and symbolic moves tied directly to Trump’s name.
• Likely to outlast Trump (longer-term effects):
  • Norm erosion: coarsening of political discourse, legitimization of retributive politics, broader acceptance of unconventional tactics in both parties.
  • Institutional damage: weakened norms at DOJ, CDC, HHS and other agencies; loss of institutional memory in Congress; a diminished sense of independent institutional integrity.
  • Strategic/foreign-policy repercussions: allies and adversaries now plan around a less reliable United States — a “rupture,” not merely a transition.
  • Party realignment/ideological shift: the GOP’s move toward nationalist, statish tendencies that could persist; Democrats may also adapt similar tactics, producing long-term instability in norms.

Notable lines:

• “Shocking, but not surprising.”
• Jonah’s metaphor: “two gas pedals and no brake” — the danger of having both parties leaning to aggressive state action without institutional brakes.

Foreign policy and national security consequences

• Central panel concern: the reputational and strategic cost of allied mistrust. The “Greenland episode” symbolized the broader problem: partners no longer automatically assume the U.S. is the reliable “good guy.”
• Long time horizons: military and defense planning is measured in decades; persistent doubts about U.S. reliability will inform European and Asian planning for 20–30 years.
• Tactical points:
  • A bombing/strike episode with Iran and strong support for Israel show some continuity in military action, but overall unpredictability worries allies.
  • Tariff threats and economic-nationalist moves send signals that weaken economic leadership and cooperative policy.
• David French’s phrasing: the effect is not primarily about temporary policies but about reinforcing the idea that millions of Americans may endorse disruptive, alliance-undermining approaches.

Institutional effects and norms

• DOJ: panelists worry about politicization and loss of “integrity” at the Department of Justice.
• Congress: risk of permanent decline in legislative capacity and institutional memory, as administrations rely more on unilateral presidential power.
• Markets as institutional check: bond and equity market reactions have constrained some policy choices, demonstrating that market forces remain an important counterweight.
• Cultural effects: coarsening of discourse, normalization of conspiratorial or “weird” subcultures in politics, and greater acceptance of retributive tactics.

Lame-duck timing — when does Trump lose bite?

• Jonah Goldberg: When primary calendar constraints remove Trump’s ability to threaten or punish incumbents in primaries — then members can act on independent agendas.
• David French: Agrees — Trump’s leverage disappears once he can no longer credibly endorse or primary members of Congress.
• Mike Warren: Joked “the day Donald Trump dies” (dark humor), but the serious point is that the president’s ability to intimidate declines as his political leverage over members wanes (electoral dynamics, midterms, primary calendar).

Not Worth Your Time — the internal podcast spat (brief)

• Sarah Isger objected strongly to changes in the “Not Worth Your Time” segment’s format and tone, which she felt stripped the segment of its original purpose (calling out topics "everyone is talking about that we shouldn't be talking about").
• Steve Hayes explained an editorial plan to alternate Monday editions (news-focused) and late-week episodes (more discursive, non-news).
• David French noted the original concept is hard to maintain weekly, so occasional non-news topics (e.g., food, condiments) are inevitable.
• The show invited audience topic suggestions (roundtable@thedispatch.com).

Notable quotes and insights

• “Executive orders are the legal version of vaporware” — executive actions are impermanent.
• “Are we the good guys anymore?” — a recurring theme about allied trust and U.S. global standing.
• “We have created a lot of plausible contingencies that allies must plan for” — unpredictable policy produces long-term strategic shifts.
• Jonah: the key question isn’t “Is Trump a fascist?” but “How many Americans want a fascist-like leader?” — a worry about the size of the political base seeking authoritarian measures.

Actionable takeaways for listeners

• Expect many Trump-era administrative policies to be reversible, but watch for durable reputational and structural effects (alliances, norms, party realignments).
• Markets remain an important constraint on policy; watch bond and equity market signals for likely policy pushback.
• Monitor primary calendars and midterm outcomes to gauge when presidential leverage over the GOP might meaningfully decline.
• The panel’s view: restoring institutional norms (DOJ, agencies, Congress) will require active choices by future leaders — it will not automatically revert.

Credits / logistics mentioned

• Panel: Steve Hayes (host), Jonah Goldberg, David French, Mike Warren, Sarah Isger; production support and show notes were referenced.
• Audience input: listeners were invited to email suggestions to roundtable@thedispatch.com and to check show notes for omitted lightning-round answers.

If you want a one-paragraph executive summary: The panel agreed Trump’s second term is more consolidated, focused on executive action and retribution, and more effective on some fronts (especially immigration) than many expected. Most policy moves are reversible, but the durable harms are reputational and institutional — allied mistrust, normalized political coarsening, and weakened institutions — changes that will affect U.S. politics and security planning well beyond his presidency.