europe is a liberal and secular society. most of the united states is not; it's really still pretty backwards, trapped in the 19th century and very conservative, rural and religious. the bible belt is on par with some backwards arab country in terms of religiosity. there are pockets of canada like alberta that are also very backwards and conservative, but canada is broadly more secular and more european than the united states.
the reason that "right-wing" european leaders can effectively run against muslim immigration is that it is absolutely correct that an influx of religious migrants threatens the secular composition of the culture. when your society goes from 80% atheist to 15% muslim over the course of a few decades, it has a gigantic effect on the way that people live their lives. indigenous europeans have every right to reject being colonized by religious middle easterners - and they have repeatedly periodically rejected these incursions over thousands of years, whether the incursions have been from carthaginians, from christians or from muslims. europe successfully decolonized itself from christianity after winning a 1000 year civil war against christian colonialism. it has good reason to be suspicious about muslim immigration, and the ruling class has good reason to want to bring muslims in to replace the defeated christians with.
conversely, the united states is a very conservative society that is not very secular at all and doesn't generate the same opposition to religious immigration that europe's secularist society does. the united states has issues with race relations, but opposition to immigration in the united states isn't about race; muslims and mexicans are mostly white. in the united states, there is no serious concept of secularism in government (jeffersonian "secularism" is a joke) and secularists have never been more than a tiny, insignificant minority. rather, the united states is culturally christian and extremely conservative in it's culturally christian reality. muslim immigration doesn't pose the same kind of threat to the conservative christian culture in the united states that it does to the liberal and socialist secularist culture in europe (they're basically the same!), and muslim immigration consequently doesn't generate the same kind of self-preservation reaction in the united states that it does in europe. if muslims took over the united states from the christians, not much would change in a lot of places; if islam conquered europe, the society and culture would be utterly destroyed very quickly.
rather, opposition to immigration in the united states is almost entirely about economics. lower income people don't want their wages undercut, or the rents to go up. they're right to be concerned about this. nowadays, this narrative comes from people that call themselves conservatives, but the narrative is socialist in origin. it's a correct economic argument, but you don't hear it in france and germany. nobody is angry about muslims stealing jobs in france, they're concerned about and upset about laicite being infringed upon, and the golden principle of state secularism being compromised on to uphold some anachronistic views from the dark ages that are, in truth, kind of american in composition. the latter is a much more powerful political force.
you're consequently not going to get the same kind of opposition to muslim immigration in the united states that you're seeing in europe because the united states is a conservative and not very secular society. large scale muslim immigration just doesn't pose the same cultural threat to american christianity that it does to european secularism. muslim migrants in north america tend to actually be a little better educated and less likely to work under the table, depress wages or steal anybody's source of labour.
trump and his cronies are missing the point if they think they can import opposition to immigration from europe to the us and if they try to do it they might just dig themselves deeper into a hole with the evangelicals that are abandoning them, and siding with the muslims, on interfaith grounds. the evangelicals may correctly look at trump and look at the muslims and decide they have more in common with the muslims and would rather invite the muslims in than try to keep them out. it's secularists that should be frightened by this developing potential alliance between christian conservatism and muslim immigration in the united states, not the dominant conservative culture in the country, which could see itself replenished with fresh recruits.
so, is trump going to run as a socialist, then, and make the opposition to immigration about economics? well, he should call pierre polievre about that.
there's some possibility that trump may find himself consumed in the issues that the next cycle will have to work out rather than the issues in front of him right now. he is not running in the next election cycle. he should focus on finishing his term, instead.