Skip to main content

Politicians make promises on their stump — we watch and hold them accountable.

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
AttemptedHousing & Infrastructure

We will build the roads, highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, and the railways of tomorrow. This, in turn, will create millions more jobs.

Sources (click to view full provenance)

Propose an edit to this promise's details

Suggest a sourced correction to the promise text, topic, scope, significance, or dates. Changing the promise text requires a source. Your suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.

Sign in to suggest a correction

Free — it takes a minute. New here? Create an account and complete the Contributor Agreement once.

Assessments

evidence-backed verdicts

These are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.

AttemptedFact-checker reviewConfidence: 75%

Independently re-verified all three cited sources as real, live, and supportive. The archived White House fact sheet confirms Trump's Feb 2018 American Infrastructure Initiative pledging $200B in federal funds to leverage $1.5T in investment (exact quote verified). PolitiFact's nonpartisan Trump-O-Meter (promise 1348) is confirmed rated 'Promise Broken,' noting 'no action evident on creating infrastructure fund.' Wikipedia and multiple independent outlets confirm no major infrastructure bill was enacted in Trump's 2017-2021 term; six 'Infrastructure Weeks' produced nothing, and an April 2019 $2T agreement with Pelosi/Schumer collapsed after Trump walked out of the May 22, 2019 meeting. ATTEMPTED is the fair classification: he genuinely advanced the promise via official proposals, budget requests, and bipartisan negotiations, but it never landed — more than IGNORED (he did engage) and less than CHAMPIONED (the plans were thin and he himself blew up the key negotiation). Not MISALIGNED/HOSTILE, as he favored building infrastructure. Mirror test: an opposite-party president with this identical record (formal plan + budget lines + real negotiations, no bill) would earn the same ATTEMPTED. Confidence held at 0.75: the underlying facts are undisputed and nonpartisan; the only soft element is the bucket choice between the neighboring outcomes.

Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)

Sign in to vote.

Discussion

community opinions

Comments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.

Sign in to join the discussion.

Propose a correction

community accountability

See an error in the promise text, status, significance, or missing source? Submit a sourced correction — a reviewer will evaluate and apply it if accurate. Your submission must cite evidence; unsourced changes are not accepted.

Sign in or create an account to propose a correction.

Debate

sourced community arguments

These are sourced community arguments — not StumpWatch assessments. Each cites a source and is community-contributed; it does not change the official status or rating above.

No arguments yet

Be the first to weigh in. Every argument cites a source and is reviewed before it publishes. Create an account to add one and help keep this promise honest.

Add a sourced argument

Cite a source for your point. Submissions are held for reviewer approval before they appear.

Sign in or create an account to add an argument.

StumpWatch is live, and the record is still growing. Many promises and positions aren’t tracked yet, and some features are still in beta. Add a sourced promise and help keep the record honest.

Help keep the record honest →