Mr. Huckabee did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday evening.

Historians said that while Churchill and Mr. Trump shared certain characteristics, the broader comparison was unsupported.

It is true that Churchill made many political enemies before World War II, said Susan Pedersen, a professor of British history at Columbia University. He was also “more self-regarding and less inclined to compromise than most successful British politicians,” she said, and “had a hard-right view of British national and imperial interest.”

“He was basically in the wilderness in 1939, and had world history and circumstance not found him, that would have been the end of the story,” Dr. Pedersen wrote in an email. “Luckily for him, and for many of us, his peculiar attributes and the needs of the time came together. But that happened partly because, for all his idiosyncrasy, he had real intellectual and political strengths: He was intelligent, literate, well-versed in history, had long experience in government, and knew what he stood for.”

The comparison to Mr. Trump, she wrote, is “ridiculous” — the same adjective David Del Testa, a historian at Bucknell University, used to describe the accompanying comparison of President Barack Obama to Neville Chamberlain.

Timothy Riley, director and chief curator of the National Churchill Museum at Westminster College in Missouri, said that Churchill “was bold and passionate about his beliefs” and, much like Mr. Trump, “was not afraid to speak his own mind and ruffle a few feathers along the way.” But for Churchill, Mr. Riley said, “the greatest task, his ‘supreme task,’ was to bring countries together to support peace and prosperity and, during the Second World War, to defeat tyranny.”

And Dr. Del Testa said that after World War I, Churchill’s “self-celebratory style” was tempered by a newfound humility.