I think any comparison of Trump to Roark is at a superficial level. Trump has much more in common with Gail Wynand.

Overman -say it ain 't so. Pay to play donald. He got 4 weeks of free media coverage. People love sound bites. Show me he has the foundations you worked your ass off to get. Show me that. He sucks

You cheapen the Howard Roark character by comparing him to Donald Trump.

I don't think Roark would have contributed to politicians with the intent of calling in favors when he needed them. Trump has also proudly proclaimed that he used the bankruptcy laws to his advantage which I think is anti-Roark as well. He has tapped in to an anti government sentiment and I hope all the candidates pick up on it. Business as usual has to be stopped.

Hello overmanwarrior,
Long time no hear. That was a very interesting piece and bit of analysis. I wish I knew what was truly inside of the man's head since he has said and done many things anathema to the the capitalist ideal and objectivist ethics. Still, I want other candidates to recognize the widespread disdain and contempt for politicos that Trump has tapped into. He is stirring the pot and pointing fingers at the establishment panderers that do nothing, fire no one and just keep talking the talk for votes. The taxpayers are sick of being reamed and taken for granted. Is it any wonder that they cry for someone that will say "you're fired!" It has been a long time coming that some heads should roll in Washington. If I could see inside his head, knew the man had truly evolved, knew the error of his past I could forgive his record and get behind him. He needs to explain much and convince me, but as I said, if he doesn't, I can only hope the other candidates are recognizing his allure and what so much of the electorate appreciates in him. It is as you have said, the Individual who is confident, assured, unabashed and willing to say no to the status quo.
Respectfully,
O.A.

I never said Trump would win, but I did say he would make it interesting. He is a showman and it is causing the establishment to quake in their boots. I think it is awesome and maybe it will wake the American voting public into awareness of what Dirty City or the District of Corruption is doing to our great country.

Y'all say he's a breath of fresh air - shaking up the corrupt political machine.
I say he's a loud-mouthed boor, better suited to the reality TV he so enthusiastically embraced.

By gawd I HATE Trump.
After 8 years of BO I'm tired of Emperators!
Who the hell is going to restore the checks and balances we've lost. Not Donald.

God save me, I'm watching a train wreck in slow motion. He has single-handedly destroyed us.
He WILL divide the GOP - he already has - and in doing so hand the election to the "progressive" (i.e. statist!) Dems.

We are running out of time. We cannot afford to continue losing the presidency.
The Dems anti-business legislation will continue to strangle the economy.

At current rates we add another $Trillion to the debt every 2 years. What happens when the interest on that debt starts to rise?

Donals Trump is a terrifying Perfect Storm. JUST the wrong man at JUST the wrong time.
---
"Largely due to the Federal Reserve's aggressive efforts to keep interest rates low, the U.S. government is paying historically low rates on its debt. In fiscal 2013, according to the Treasury Department, the average interest rate on the public debt was 2.43%." PewResearch.Org

So "[Trump] truly wants to save America, not just
to provide an ego boost for himself."?--Oh, please.
He doesn't seem to me to have deep-rooted philo-
sophical convictions; he has bragged about his
lack of principle in going along with the system,
the laws that were in place, as he said, and his
willingness to bribe politicians. I would still take
him over Obama (who, thank goodness, can't get in again) or Hillary Clinton, but it would be
dangerous to have him as the nominee. I'd
rather have Cruz.

I think Rand would be horrified by attempts to compare Trump to Roark. Not so much because of accomplishment, but because of demeanor. Roark is the archetype of the hero who doesn't allow others to influence his goals or his feelings. ("But I don't think of you, Mr. Toohey.").
To me, Trump is more of a Hank Rearden, but with more self esteem and confidence in the rightness of what he does. That rightness may be misplaced at times, but it serves him well.

As I recall, Howard Roark was a success by virtue of the quality of his work and only the quality of his work. I do not recall any instance where Howard Roark or that other HR, Hank Rearden, ever paid a dime to benefit from the power of political pull. On the other hand, Donald Trump relishes the fact that his hands are elbow deep in the political feed trough feeding the political pigs on both sides of the aisle.

I don't recall Roark or Rearden ever declaring bankruptcy and proudly telling their creditors what they can go do with themselves. Trump, on the other hand, despite being worth billions and able to pay his debts, is perfectly happy to spit in the face of the people that have ponied up their hard earned money to invest in his projects.

I don't remember Roark or Rearden ever threatening anyone with meritless lawsuits after meritless lawsuits. Trump, on the other hand, is only happy when he is destroying people. Sometimes he uses the truth. Other times, he is just a flat out bombastic liar who will say anything to get what he wants. Then again, when people stand up to him, he brings out his army of attack dog lawyers to ruin people.

Lastly, I don't ever remember thinking that Howard Roark or Hank Rearden were dishonorable, Machiavellian, soulless scumbags. I cannot say the same for Donald Trump.

There are only a couple similarities I can find between Ms. Rand's characters and Trump. First, all of these men were/are working for their own self interest. Roark, Rearden and Trump make no apologies whatsoever in pursuing their own goals in life. Roark and Rearden both got wealthy by providing value for value and by besting their competitors in the marketplace. Unlike Roark and Rearden though, Trump's goals are, as often as not, achieved at the expense of others. Another similarity is that none of these men make apologies for their success. So long as Trump stays a private citizen, I have no problem with him working toward his own ends. As a presidential candidate though, I don't see any scenario where he'd have the ability to do anything for me. In order to do that, he'd have to strip power from the federal government and give it back to the people and the States as required in the 10th Amendment. Can you see any scenario where Donald Trump would ever even consider limiting his own power? Moving on, Roark and Rearden never blamed others for the hardships they endured. Roark fought through it to earn a prominent place in his field, and Rearden ultimately chose to remove himself from the influences of an unfair society. Where Trump differs is that his name and blame go hand in hand. He is always pointing fingers in every direction but his own. Frankly, it's another personality trait that I have no use for.

It should be obvious by now that I have no respect for Donald trump whatsoever, and any notion that he is somehow similar to Howard Roark strikes me as insane.

I do understand, however, why Trump has some appeal. We are so starved for anyone to stand up and call out the political cowardice we see from the GOP in Washington that a bombthrower like Trump can come along and temporarily fill that hole. That said, my vote goes to Ted Cruz whether he's on the ballot or not. Unlike Trump, Cruz's conservative principles have been on public display from day 1. Cruz has not wavered an inch from his core principles as far as I can tell, and he has proven that he is willing to fight for those principles regardless of what price he is forced to pay either by the mainstream media or the political class in DC. Cruz, like Trump, is not bashful about calling out the go along to get along spineless political hacks in DC. Unlike Trump, Ted Cruz has not played both sides of the political fence. he has not hedged his bets by buying off anybody from either side of the aisle. Also unlike Trump, Ted Cruz has the intellectual ability to fully understand the issues at hand, and he can dominate any Democrat in a debate without resorting to empty self promotion, bombast and insults.

Surprised no one has pointed out that Reardon, like several Rand "heroes" was a flawed hero, partly because he did not fully understand, as Galt did, the nature of the world he was fighting. Dagny was also flawed, so were many others.. They all had strengths, but significant weaknesses, too, and all were all learning and grappling with the evil of collectivism - but they were not fully aware. Rand leads us through, and, in several major speeches,clarifies her philosophy and displays her more perfect heroes, Roark and Galt.

Some characteristics of some of Rand's characters match up well with some characteristics of Trump, but others do not, and there is no particularly solid match that I can see.
Trump is also a flawed hero. Many admirable qualities, but others, not so much.

His ascendancy, and his presidency, should that occur, would be a mixed bag, to say the least.

That's not to say it wouldn't be our best option.

Sorry Mr. Trump, but you are no Roark!
This article is absurd.
Of course Rand's characters "pointed to" Rand; how could they be "just who they were" without her philosophy?
What Hoffman does not understand is that Trump is not the egoist he imagines (e.g. his "I" does not equate to rational selfishness...just consider how he sacrifices others). And he certainly is not a true capitalist.
Objectivists need to make sure that he does not get linked with Objectivism. Ditto for Rand Paul.

He needs to tell us (a) how he came to change his mind from some of the positions he once held, and (b) how he plans to achieve certain ends he has promised.

He also needs to start talking like a winner.