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.
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.
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:
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.
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.)