MAGA's new playbook exposed: How Trump voters rationalize abandoning their principles

A protester holds a sign saying "Trump wins" at a rally in support of U.S. President Donald Trump at the Oregon State Capitol in Salem, Oregon, U.S. January 6, 2021. REUTERS/Terray Sylvester

Steven Greenhut reports in Reason Magazine that the MAGA world has three go-to approaches for jettisoning their so-called principals to follow President Donald Trump — but rest assured they will follow.

“First, they claim his latest notion is part of a 3D chess game even if, by all appearances, Trump would struggle to play one-level tic-tac-toe. Second, they distract our attention: Didn't Barack Obama do this, too? Third, they get with the program and shamelessly back whatever the president is doing,” said Greenhut. “Sometimes MAGA-supporting influencers with their own agendas and philosophies take issue with some Trump policy. But rank-and-file MAGA always follows the Dear Leader even if it means contradicting some Deeply Held Principle they espoused weeks ago.”

It’s a shocking pivot, said Greenhut, but it’s their reality. Before he invaded Iran, Trump once touted himself as the peace candidate. And JD Vance has always made the case for opposing America's endless international interventions.

“Trump warned that Joe Biden might start World War III. White House adviser Stephen Miller posted that ‘KAMALA WILL SEND YOUR SONS TO WAR’ if she won.

But Vance about-faced to serve a man he once called “America's Hitler,” despite his intelligence, and MAGA are truthfully “no friends of freedom and democracy,” said Greenhut.

“Their ‘peace’ stance in Ukraine aligns seamlessly with Moscow's, as they essentially argue the best way to stop the tragic killing is for victims to lay down their arms and submit to an invader,” said Greenhut. “Trump and MAGA have even blamed Ukraine and NATO for Russian aggression and warned that U.S. support could spark the next world war. At least I can contort their position, however muddleheaded, into some anti-war narrative. But Iran? A war of choice seems more likely to spark widespread convulsions.

Greenhut notes Trump’s ever-shifting rationale for invading a Middle Eastern wasp nest with 60 million angry people and a fist on the planet’s oil supply, but he says it doesn’t matter. Trump could have accused Iran of anything or fashioned any particular pretense. MAGA will stand with him nonetheless, despite the impending chaos that will come of Trump’s invasion.

“We can expect the usual: a destabilized region, years of unforeseen and negative consequences, billions of lost American dollars, and lost lives,” said Greenhut. “The one tiny potential upside of the populist movement was its apparent reluctance to plunge the nation into foreign debacles. That's gone now, but it shouldn't be a surprise given that MAGA isn't so much a political philosophy as a cult of personality.”

From Your Site Articles