Documentation Standards
Methodology
Trump's Folly applies a consistent methodology to all Archive entries. This page describes that methodology in full. We recommend reading it before contacting us to dispute an entry.
Inclusion Criteria
An action, decision, or statement qualifies for documentation in the Archive when it meets our threshold of Historical Significance — defined as a score of 6 or higher on our 10-point scale (described below). Trump's Folly applies no ideological filter. We document decisions that meet the threshold regardless of which political tradition they emerge from or whether we find them sympathetic.
Trump's Folly does not document every controversial statement or action. The volume of candidates in the current period exceeds our documentation capacity. We prioritize entries with the highest Historical Significance ratings, the clearest factual record, and the widest documented impact.
Entries where the factual record is disputed are held until sufficient independent verification exists. Trump's Folly does not add entries on the basis of allegations.
Historical Significance Rating
Each entry receives a Historical Significance rating from 1 to 10. This rating reflects our assessment of the decision's likely long-term impact on institutions, policy, economics, foreign relations, or democratic norms. It is not a rating of the decision's morality or political wisdom. It is a rating of its historical weight.
Minor significance. Likely to be resolved or reversed. Limited long-term institutional impact. Documented for completeness.
Moderate significance. Meaningful policy or institutional impact. Likely to be referenced in future historical accounts of the period.
High significance. Substantial institutional, economic, or foreign policy impact. Will be a primary reference point in historical documentation of this period.
Exceptional significance. Generational impact on institutions, alliances, economic structures, or constitutional norms. Will be a central feature of historical accounts of the early 21st century.
Appendix A, which defines the rating criteria in greater technical detail, is available upon request. No one has requested it. Trump's Folly considers this consistent with how people generally engage with methodology sections.
Status Classifications
Each entry carries one of three status designations:
Ongoing — The decision has been made and documented, but the full outcome is not yet known. Most current entries carry this designation. Trump's Folly does not speculate about outcomes. We wait and document.
Resolved — The outcome is sufficiently documented to close the entry. Resolved entries remain in the Archive permanently.
Outcome Unknown — The entry has been closed for documentation purposes but the ultimate impact cannot be determined with current information. Reserved for entries where the causal chain is too complex or too long to permit clean resolution.
What We Do Not Do
Trump's Folly does not evaluate whether documented decisions were correct. We do not recommend alternative courses of action. We do not project counterfactuals. We do not express opinions about the motivations behind documented decisions. We do not rate decisions as good or bad — only as historically significant or not.
We understand this frustrates some readers who feel the decisions documented here warrant stronger language. We acknowledge their frustration. We document anyway.