# Conservatives are souring on Trump, but does this mean what anyone hopes it means? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [June 28, 2026, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247 "2026-06-28T15:28:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2026, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247/21 "2026-06-28T22:35:28Z")
Presidents generally lose support over time as they invariably default on campaign promises and fail to satisfy everybody. The Big Beautiful Bill, for all its “conservative” bells and whistles, is impacting out-of-pocket health insurance costs for many of his younger supporters that rely on marketplace subsidies. And Mr. Trump’s 2025-26 foreign policy is a far cry from his 2016 campaign. Trump tarriffs were a hard sell in 2024 and it’s difficult to blame the economy on Democrats when your party has a trifecta; it is even more difficult to deflect responsibility for oil prices when you are the one poking the Middle East. But these are gripes about governance. Even as Trump’s approval ratings decline and his agenda proves divisive, the electoral formula that returned Republicans to unified control is likely to remain the party’s organizing principle until it demonstrably stops winning elections. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2026, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247/22 "2026-06-29T00:32:31Z")
Conservatives souring on Trump is real but not as dramatic as might be thought because Donald will let them have their way on a few issues without a fight. For an example, see this Politico link: [The 21st Century ROAD To Housing Act](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/28/mike-johnson-trump-housing-bill-00979341) The purpose of the bill is to bring down housing prices. Trump is supposedly refusing to sign the bill because of insisting that the unrelated SAVE Act come first. But, actually, Trump is against the fundamental goal of the Housing Act. Associated Press: [“I don’t want to drive housing prices down. I want to drive housing prices up for people that own their homes, and they can be assured that’s what’s going to happen,” Trump told his Cabinet on Jan. 29.](https://apnews.com/article/trump-housing-mortgage-midterm-elections-prices-affordability-6bda9c1260550990bc819bcb6f1402cf) So what will Trump do? Will he defy his party and veto the bill. My prediction is No. If Trump wanted to annoy his congressional base without generating a lot of publicity on his desire to raise housing costs, Donald could try a pocket veto over the July 4 congressional recess. He won’t do that either. Johnson and Thune will, I expect, briefly open Congress during the recess in order to prevent a pocket veto, causing a bill Donald dislikes to become law, and without Trump making a big issue over it. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2026, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247/23 "2026-06-29T01:13:23Z")
I mean, they’d have to meet and officially adjourn, wouldn’t they? Simply missing a pro-forma session doesn’t automatically put congress into adjournment. Much of the speculation I saw on Trump’s move was that his intent was for a pocket veto rather than a regular veto as the latter can be overridden. The question then was if either house would be so spineless as to adjourn for him. (It is unclear to me if only one house adjourning would be enough.) ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2026, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247/24 "2026-06-29T01:39:13Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I mean, they’d have to meet and officially adjourn, wouldn’t they? Simply missing a pro-forma session doesn’t automatically put congress into adjournment. You’d think that after something like 235 years under this constitution, there would be clear precedents for all such questions about how the pocket veto works. But apparently it isn’t totally clear how long they have to be away for it to be an official ajounment. My prediction is that Trump will not push for a pocket veto because he doesn’t want to force Johnson into a humiliating backdown. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2026, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247/25 "2026-06-29T06:46:59Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Unless he negotiates a full pardon from President Vance for any and all crimes committed past, present and future. I could see that happening if Trump has enough over Vance to force him to go along with it. That dirt might even be stuff Trump made Vance do in the first place. That’s very much a “wannabe Mob boss” move that seems very much on brand for Trump. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2026, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247/26 "2026-06-29T18:32:11Z")
> [@enipla](#): > > And somehow his idiot supporters think they will get a piece of the pie. His tax bills did help out rich dudes. But most of his supporters arent wealthy. > [@steronz](#): > > When Trump dies, the ensuing power struggle will see people doing everything they can to distance themselves from _Trump_ (without speaking any ill words about him) while doubling down on _Trumpism_. That would be my guess also. Right Wing Populism is doing well all over the world. > [@bobot](#): > > 1. They elected him a second time. Trump wins. He is above the law, will never face justice, made more corrupt money as president than he ever made before, and conservatives would elect him again if they could. Yes, they elected him again, but that was two years ago. He is corrupt- > **[Two Major Trump Corruption Plots Revealed in Just 24 Hours](https://newrepublic.com/post/212458/trump-lutnick-corruption-plots-kazakhstan-ice)** > > Donald Trump—and his sons—have found new ways to profit off the presidency. > _President Donald Trump and his family continue to dominate the field when it comes to corruption, with two new scandals exposed just within the last 24 hours._ > > _On Sunday, [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/28/world/europe/trump-lutnick-sons-kazakhstan.html)[reported](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/28/world/europe/trump-lutnick-sons-kazakhstan.html) that the Trump family stands to reap the financial benefits of a deal that gives the U.S. access to one of the earth’s largest reserves of tungsten, a metal needed to make fighter jets, computer chips, and missile warheads._ But he isnt getting away with everything- > **[Trump laments 'tremendous loss' on mail-in ballots at Supreme Court, doubles...](https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/29/supreme-court-elections-mail-trump-mississippi.html)** > > Justice Amy Coney Barrett, whom Trump nominated in 2020, rejected arguments that federal laws preempt Mississippi permitting late-arriving absentee ballots. > - **The Supreme Court ruled that Mississippi can continue to count some absentee ballots received after Election Day, rejecting a Republican challenge to the state law.** > - **The 5-4 ruling is a blow to ongoing efforts by President Donald Trump and the GOP to curtail mail-in voting ahead of the midterms.** > - **“Nothing in the federal election-day statutes requires ballots to be received by election day,” the high court held.** > - **Trump wrote after the ruling, “In light of the tremendous loss in the Supreme Court today … it is more important than ever to pass THE SAVE AMERICA ACT.”** and > **[Supreme Court will not consider $5 million verdict against Trump](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/06/supreme-court-will-not-consider-5-million-verdict-against-trump/)** > The Supreme Court on Monday **[announced](https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/062926zor_1bn2.pdf)** that it will not hear an appeal by President Donald Trump seeking review of the $5 million jury verdict entered against him in the sexual abuse and defamation case filed by journalist E. Jean Carroll. The **[petition for review](https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-573/384069/20251110150010381_Petition%20and%20Appendix.pdf)** was conferenced by the justices for the first time on June 25 after being first scheduled for a conference in February and then rescheduled more than a dozen times. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2026, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247/27 "2026-06-29T21:36:58Z")
If by conservatives we mean Roberts and whichever other Republican justice he can join with on a disputed case, I do not see today’s ruling as a strong indication of souring. The most important case today, when it comes to the question of whether Donald Trump is a dictator, is the reversal of Humphrey’s Executor: > **[Supreme Court Overrules Humphrey’s Executor, Vastly Expands Presidential...](https://www.consumerfinancemonitor.com/2026/06/29/supreme-court-overrules-humphreys-executor-vastly-expands-presidential-removal-authority-but-preserves-federal-reserve-independence/)** > > In a pair of very important decisions issued today, the U.S. Supreme Court reshaped the constitutional landscape governing independent federal agencies. [From The Bulwark](https://www.thebulwark.com/p/pay-her-pay-that-woman-her-money-e-jean-carroll-trump): > [@](#): > > The Roberts Court seems to have settled on the idea that it will hand Trump tactical defeats so that it can give him strategic victories. . . . > > Like with tariffs, this [Federal Reserve] decision was written narrowly. It is possible that another attempt to fire Cook could succeed. And there were four votes for the idea that Federal Reserve governors _should_ be at-will employees subject to the whims of the president. > > And even this narrow ruling was balanced by [other](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a966_1b8e.pdf) [rulings](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-332_qn12.pdf) in which Roberts was on the other side overturning precedent allowing Trump to fire pretty much anyone else . . . [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-are-souring-on-trump-but-does-this-mean-what-anyone-hopes-it-means/1031247.md?page=1)