By Yair Rosenberg
Tuesday, January 13, 2026
To judge by recent accounts, Donald Trump’s intervention
in Venezuela has imperiled his standing among his own supporters.
Traditional-media outlets have warned
of a MAGA schism, as have some high-profile right-wing influencers. “President
Trump seized control of the Republican Party on an anti-interventionist
‘America First’ platform,” The New York Times reported
on January 4, but his removal of Venezuela’s leader “threatened to open a new
rift within the political movement he has built.” The former Trump strategist
Steve Bannon told
the paper that the president’s messaging “on a potential occupation has the
base bewildered, if not angry.” Two months before the U.S. military captured
Nicolás Maduro, the conservative commentator Tucker Carlson warned against
American intervention and suggested that efforts to oust the Venezuelan
dictator were part of—I am not
making this up—a “globohomo” conspiracy to bring gay marriage to the
country.
The theory of a MAGA rupture over Venezuela has a certain
surface plausibility. It’s also completely contradicted by what masses of
Trump’s backers are telling pollsters. Two days after the Maduro operation, a
Reuters/Ipsos poll found
that 65 percent of Republicans supported it, compared with just 6 percent who
didn’t. Another poll,
by The Washington Post, pegged that support at 74 percent. And a
subsequent YouGov/CBS survey recorded
even more striking results: 89 percent of Republicans backed Maduro’s ouster,
and for self-described “MAGA Republicans,” the number was 97 percent—a level of
enthusiasm that would make even the election-rigging Maduro blush. Days after
the Times quoted Bannon fretting about the GOP base’s alleged upset over
Venezuela, the paper spoke to its own yearlong panel of Trump backers and reported,
with characteristic understatement, that such “skepticism may not be shared by
many rank-and-file Republican voters.”
This sequence of events follows a familiar pattern. For
months, major media outlets have run story after story about the alleged
crack-up of Trump’s MAGA base, sourced to a specific set of elite right-wing
influencers. These accounts have been widely shared and celebrated by liberal
readers and pundits. And yet for months, that crack-up has failed to
meaningfully materialize in polls and focus groups, and the allegations of MAGA
infighting have borne little resemblance to the real-world trajectory of conservative
politics, where Trump still reigns supreme.
This same pattern—in which so-called Trump influencers
asserted a MAGA split where none was actually in evidence, and various news
outlets ate it up—was apparent last summer over a different foreign
intervention. Before America attacked Iran’s nuclear sites in June, outlets
such as Politico hyped
a “MAGA civil war” over the prospect. “A strike on the Iranian nuclear sites
will almost certainly result in thousands of American deaths,” Carlson claimed. War
with Iran, he later added,
would amount to a “profound betrayal” of Trump’s supporters and “end his
presidency.” Such a conflict would “tear the country apart,” warned Bannon.
“MAGA Divide Over Iran Splinters Trump Allies,” declared
The Hill. Curt Mills, the anti-interventionist executive director of The
American Conservative, told
ABC News that the president’s coalition was “revolting to show it’s disgusted
with the potential of war with Iran.” That very evening, Trump bombed Iran.
Not only did Trump disregard all of these alleged MAGA
thought leaders—so did MAGA voters. YouGov/CBS News found
that 85 percent of Republicans backed the strikes, including 94 percent of
self-described MAGA Republicans. “While all Republican factions support the
airstrikes,” NBC News wrote
of its similar survey results, “respondents who identify with the MAGA movement
are significantly more supportive of them than those who identify as
traditional Republicans.”
The obvious conclusion is this: These purportedly
pro-Trump figures do not actually speak for Trump or his supporters. Trumpism
is not neo-isolationist or neoconservative, pro-restraint or pro-intervention.
It is not pro-worker or pro-billionaire. It is whatever Trump says it is.
According to YouGov, two weeks before American forces snatched Maduro,
Republican support for invading Venezuela stood at 43
percent. Today that number is 74
percent. “America First” and “Make America Great Again” are slogans, not
deeply held governing philosophies. They are branding—and Trump is the brand.
Republican defectors such as the former Georgia
Representative Marjorie
Taylor Greene are often held up as evidence of Trump’s slackening hold on
his base. But Greene’s trajectory proves just the opposite. As soon as the
president turned on her, her political career became untenable and she quickly
announced her departure from Congress. Influencers such as Greene, Bannon, and
Carlson present themselves as fighting against out-of-touch elites on behalf of
the “America First” masses, but again and again, it is they who have been
exposed as elites at odds with the movement they claim to represent. No one has
ever spoken for the MAGA coalition other than the man who created it.
Now, it is true that Trump’s overall popularity has been eroding,
as my colleague Jonathan Chait recently wrote,
but that’s not because he’s losing his base. Rather, it’s because he’s bleeding
support among a very different demographic that helped elect him—namely, low-propensity
swing voters, especially young men, who backed him because of their
concerns about the economy or political correctness. But although the president
may be losing these fair-weather friends, the much-larger MAGA movement remains
firmly in his corner.
“Let me be very clear: There is no rift in the Republican
Party,” said
CNN’s chief data analyst, Harry Enten, last week. “Donald Trump has had an iron
grip on that Republican base for a long period of time, and it is the same iron
grip that he had six months ago,” he continued, pointing to polls showing Trump
maintaining an 85 percent approval rating among Republicans despite headlines
to the contrary. “Every so often, people are trying to say, ‘Oh, I spot these
little rifts in the Republican base. Oh, oh, you know, they’re finally starting
to break. They’re starting to break from Donald Trump.’ It ain’t happening.”
None of this is to say that Trump supporters are on board
with everything he does. Voters often have things they dislike about their
preferred candidate; those things are just not decisive. For years, most
Republicans told
pollsters
that they thought Trump tweeted too much; that didn’t stop them from voting
for him or his preferred GOP-primary candidates. Today, most Republicans don’t like how Trump has
handled the Epstein files—but most Republicans are not choosing how to vote
based on the Epstein files. People tend to make allowances for politicians they
like, and Trump has an exceptional instinct for what his supporters actually
care about and what they’re willing to overlook, which is why they have stuck
with him for more than a decade.
So why do so many reports continue to argue otherwise?
The zombie narrative about Trump’s supposedly splintering support has been
fueled by a confluence of right-wing, left-wing, and journalistic impulses.
Many reporters are drawn to stories of drama and conflict. Many liberals are
desperate for signs that Trump’s stranglehold over his base is slipping. And a
group of media-savvy right-wing influencers have exploited these desires to
promote a story about widespread MAGA discontent that has little basis in fact
but that serves their own interests.
And those interests are no longer reliably aligned with
Trump’s. As hard-right populists, Bannon and Carlson initially sought to use
Trump to advance their own agenda—isolationist abroad, ultranationalist at
home, and more
overtly anti-Semitic. But as Trump has deviated from that agenda,
particularly in foreign affairs, they have begun seeking to supplant him. By
weakening the president, they hope to have a say in picking his successor and
directing the party after he departs the scene, reshaping the Republican Party
more reliably in their image.
To these men, Trump’s sway over the MAGA faithful is an
obstacle to be overcome. They are careful not to openly disparage the president
himself, in deference to his influence, but their growing animosity has become
impossible to miss. In recent months, Bannon has opposed
Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthy; broken with him on Iran, Venezuela, and
support for Israel; and repeatedly called for driving the president’s Big Tech
buddies out of the MAGA tent, dubbing Elon
Musk and David
Sacks “sociopathic overlords in Silicon Valley.” Carlson’s disdain for the
president goes way back. “We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump
most nights. I truly can’t wait,” he messaged
his TV producer after the president lost in 2020. “I hate him passionately.”
Add to this the two men’s formidable skill at
manipulating traditional and social media—Carlson long served
as a source for the liberal press he publicly disdains, and both he and Bannon
host popular podcasts that regularly drive online conversation—and the result
has been a self-perpetuating cycle in which left-wing wishful thinking meets
right-wing opportunism. Carlson and Bannon (and others like them) tell amenable
liberals and media outlets what they want to hear; those groups then echo the
narrative of MAGA infighting, thereby helping the Trump frenemies inflate their
influence and undermine the administration—but by no means furthering the
public’s understanding of the actual political dynamics at work.
Carlson, Bannon, and their allies have several more years
to chip away at Trump’s standing on the right—and may yet succeed—but they have
a very long way to go. Last week, Carlson welcomed James Fishback, a far-right
fringe candidate for Florida governor who shares many of Carlson’s views, to
his show. “Pretty soon, all winning Republican politicians will talk like
this,” Carlson wrote
on X when he posted the interview. The same day, a poll of the GOP
gubernatorial primary in Florida found that the Trump-backed Representative
Byron Donalds was leading Fishback by a healthy 47 percent to 5 percent. But
that wasn’t all. “His lead leaps to 76%-6% over Fishback,” reported
Florida Phoenix, “when voters are informed about the Trump endorsement.”
No comments:
Post a Comment