Is Donald Trump running for president or self-preservation?

When Donald Trump first ran for office in 2016, his scattershot campaign was largely predicated on his promise that "I alone can fix" an apocalyptic list of nationalist grievances and political shortcomings. Four years later, Trump's 2020 reelection campaign unsuccessfully pivoted toward a more traditional message of "promises made, promises kept" to justify a second term in the White House. Now, as Trump enjoys a comfortable lead over the crowded 2024 GOP presidential primary field, the former president is once again offering an overtly authoritarian pitch to voters, declaring "I am your justice" even as he faces a growing slate of serious criminal indictments for his actions before, during and after his time in office.

Given the legitimate legal peril in which he now finds himself, it becomes difficult to extricate the politics and policies of Trump's 2024 presidential campaign from his personal interests and longstanding penchant for self-preservation. As Trump begins to roll out his vision for a second term in office, a number of pundits and experts have begun asking: Is he serious about policy change, or is he simply looking out for himself?

What are the commentators saying?

Trump has "spoken about how when you are the president of the United States, it is tough for politically motivated prosecutors to 'get to you,'" Rolling Stone reported last year, adding that he believes a second Trump administration would "put a stop to the [Justice Department] investigation that he views as the Biden administration working to hit him with criminal charges — or even put him and his people in prison." Trump himself seemed to confirm that self-preservationist sentiment, telling Politico that he'd remain in the race even if any of his indictments resulted in a conviction. "I'll never leave," Trump said. "Look, if I would have left, I would have left prior to the original race in 2016. That was a rough one. In theory that was not doable."

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

"I certainly believe that he's trying to use his candidacy and his campaign as a shield against legal prosecution," agreed Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) in a recent interview with MSNBC. "That's probably the dominant factor for getting back in, other than reviving the money-making operation. That was the first administration."

To the extent that Trump has previewed his policy priorities for a second term, they've ranged from fanciful — the creation of ten futuristic new "freedom cities" complete with flying cars — to bureaucratic, particularly in regards to his vision for the executive branch. Trump's "broader goal," The New York Times reported this week, is to "alter the balance of power by increasing the president's authority over every part of the federal government that now operates, by either law or tradition, with any measure of independence from political interference by the White House." And even though this sort of radical realignment has been in some form a priority for conservatives at large, in the former president's hands the effort has the distinct markings of a politically motivated purge designed to shield Trump from any intra-governmental opposition. As the Times noted, Trump currently promises on his campaign website to "find and remove the radicals who have infiltrated the federal Department of Education" and listed a litany of targets at a rally last month including a pledge to "demolish the deep state" which he has long claimed has personally targeted him in the form of his various criminal indictments.

"No matter how well-laid the plans for a second Trump term, nor how thoroughly vetted the people carrying them out, Mr. Trump would still be in charge, which means there is a limit to how methodical it could be," The Economist pointed out in its profile of the conservative think tanks working on behalf of — and concurrently with — Trump. "As for the candidate himself, he is aware of the plans being made on his behalf but has never been excited by the details of public policy."

What could happen next?

"Trump still doesn't get it: To protect himself from prosecution and possible federal incarceration, the last thing he should want is to win the presidency," The Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin wrote recently. "Trump, his supporters and the media have become infatuated with the myth of 'self-pardon.'" Noting that the concept of self-pardoning is legally dubious at best, Rubin also wrote that "Trump's notion that he can avoid prosecution by winning an election has another obvious flaw: No president has the ability to pardon himself or anyone else for state crimes." In light of Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fanni Willis expected plans to release a state indictment against Trump sometime this summer, Rubin wrote that if the former president "really wants to avoid prosecution — and punishment, if convicted — for alleged state crimes, he would have to arrange a plea, something he has refused to consider, or flee to a jurisdiction without extradition."

"Running for president won't help those cases go away," she concluded.

It seems, then, that his campaign is at once an exercise in self-preservation, as well as a genuine push (aided in part by invested conservative stakeholders) to alter the size and scope of the federal government. That Trump believes a second term in office may shield him from legal consequences does not mean his campaign is not simultaneously working to enact policies whose effects extend far beyond Trump's immediate circumstances. Ultimately, the binary of "self-interest" and "enacting a political paradigm shift" falls short of fully encompassing Trump's reasons for running; rather, they work in tandem, informing one another when possible, and running parallel when not. The question is: how long can that last?