The Economist: Trump is more dangerous as presidency wobbles
The publication argues the US president is not a lame duck, but a defensive leader protecting his dominance amid escalating trade and legal disputes.
The Economist has published an analysis suggesting that US President Donald Trump is becoming more dangerous as his presidency faces increasing headwinds. The publication explicitly rejects the traditional narrative of a "lame duck" leader, instead characterising the current political stance as a defensive effort to maintain dominance.
In its assessment, The Economist likens Trump’s behaviour to an ageing silverback gorilla. This metaphor is used to describe the volatility and defensive posture of a leader who feels his grip on power is slipping, rather than the passive decline often associated with the final years of a term.
This analysis arrives against a backdrop of significant domestic and international tensions. The US Supreme Court recently cleared the path for an executive order restricting mail-in voting in 23 states and the District of Columbia. This legal victory is expected to have a direct impact on the upcoming November midterms, with election experts warning of potential chaos.
On the trade front, the bilateral dispute with Canada has escalated sharply. President Trump announced a 50 per cent tariff increase on imports of cars, trucks, and auto parts from Canada. The new rate is set to take effect on 1 January 2027, adding further uncertainty to the North American supply chain.
The geopolitical landscape has also shifted, with the collapse of a 60-day ceasefire between the US and Iran in June 2026 contributing to the broader environment of instability. These concurrent pressures form the context for The Economist’s argument that the current phase of the presidency is more volatile than previously anticipated.
For investors and institutions, the key takeaway is the shift in risk perception. The publication’s framing suggests that policy decisions may be driven by a need to assert dominance rather than long-term strategic planning, a dynamic that could influence market sentiment in the lead-up to the midterms.

