People's revolutions have about the worst track record.
Revolutions are funny things. Generally speaking, they occur because some sufficient number of people have legitimate complaints, and have finally had enough of the current regime. Thus, the French Revolution, in which the aristocracy lived very high on the hog at crushing expense and injustice to the peasantry -- this is the usual dynamic.
What set our revolution apart from the others, is three things:
First, the Americans of the time were John Adams' "moral and religious people," and as individuals they were highly self-sufficient -- a combination that leads to a good deal of common sense and responsible action.
Second, the revolution came about as Britain tried to reassert its authority over the colonies, which had in large part been self-governing for decades during the English Civil War and the unrest that followed. It wasn't really a "revolution" in the same sense as the French Revolution -- it was more an armed consummation of a long-existing state of affairs. The American colonists figured they could do a better job themselves. But a large number of loyalists were left out in the cold....
And third, Americans had (and took) the option of moving west -- there wasn't the same "pressure cooker" dynamic as occurred in densely-populated and confined France.
Trump's approach is far more similar to the French revolution -- his demagoguery is aimed at inflaming the pre-existing frustrations of a particular segment of the population.
