Just what would MAGA object to?
Leaving his wife and kids for another woman.
They didn’t care about Trump doing that.
That was done long before Trump was running for office. Besides, Vance ain’t Trump.
Or Newt Gingrich. Or Rudy Giuliani. Or Ronald Reagan.
Hell, Ronald Reagan signed the first “No-Fault Divorce” bill into law when he was Governor of California.
If there’s one thing we should have all learned in the last ten years it’s the normal rules do not apply to Trump. What should have killed his presidential campaign in 2016 didn’t hurt him, the crimes he’s committed should have landed him in prison, his lies and corruption should have caught up to him by now, but if anything you’d think the damage he’s done to his own constituents would have hurt him but it has not. Whatever the rules are they do not appear to apply to Trump.
I don’t mean to imply that he’s invincible. Trump doesn’t get whatever he wants. But just because Trump gets away with something doesn’t mean Kash Patel, JD Vance of Pete Hegseth can get away with it. At least not without Donald’s protection.
But she’s not white, or Christian. He would be leaving an anchor baby for the widow of a MAGA martyr. Sounds like that increases his support, to me.
You forget, he’s a Republican; treating your wife like garbage is a virtue to them.
I don’t think Vance will ever have significant MAGA support no matter what he does.
It might play to the base a bit, but it would hurt him outside it.
A sitting vice-president divorces his wife and is known to be cavorting with another woman before the divorce is final. That would generate a ton of publicity, and none of it good.
Vance probably won’t lose much MAGA support, no matter what he does. But there’s a lot of non-MAGAites who would not look kindly on those headlines. And I don’t think there are lot of GOP congresspeople who would appreciate the leader of their party acting in a non-family-values manner.
Looking at last month’s polling for the 2028 GOP nomination, he already does:
2028 Republican Presidential Nomination
Scrolling down, we can see how it has been changing since election day. The big change is that Trump Jr.'s support has collapsed while Vance has become a tremendous favorite.
When Trump isn’t threatening a third term, he says the real choice is between Rubio and Vance. But Rubio’s GOP primary support is consistently below ten percent, while Vance’s support is consistently above forty percent.
I realize that GOP primary voters who respond to pollsters aren’t all MAGA. But I think a lot them are, and see no reason to think they won’t support Vance so long as Trump allows it..
I am not saying that polls predict well three years out. But they can tell you that MAGA would find someone acceptable.
If you want to look for a party a bit more in danger of breakup, and (thankfully to me) totally unwilling to fight a civil war, I would look to the Democrats.
I did not express my thought well. MAGA will never have the enthusiasm for Vance that they have had for Trump, and MAGA as we know it will cease to exist once Trump is off the stage. That said, those people are going to vote for someone insofar as they vote at all, and, yes, I agree that Vance is and will be the obvious front runner. But I think voter enthusiasm among the base will take a big hit.
Jr., lulz.
The GOP is MAGA now (it has not survived), but MAGA itself can’t survive without its Orange God.
While I don’t think Vance will have the same level of support Trump has, I do believe he’s most likely to be the party’s nomination in 2028. No doubt he’ll be a shoo in thanks to Trump having made American great by 2028.
With low confidence, I agree with you on enthusiasm. I just don’t think enthusiasm is important. If ICE enthusiastically deports someone, or does it sullenly, they are still deported.
As for MAGA ceasing to exist, hope you are right!
But what does MAGA mean? Is it just rule by the Trump family? If so, it probably — again, low confidence — has just a couple years to run.
To me, MAGA is the takeover of the GOP by isolationist nativists who disrespect limited government and the rule of law. If this is the definition, I think it has longer to run.
And? How does the inevitable and repeated rebranding of conservatism matter if the same stupid voters that have been swallowing this shit in some form since at least Nixon continue to eagerly vote against their own self-interest?
Interesting how everyone seems to assume that it’s entirely a matter for Vance who he’s married to.
Voter enthusiasm is important. It affects whether people go to the polls to vote.
Yeah, no one cares at all about the rest of the shitheads.
Before Trump, there were of course various coalitions on the right: fundies and fiscals under Reagan, etc. The Tea Party was more or less proto-MAGA. But Trump was needed to tap into the ultimate base, the mean-dumb people (aka, Deplorables). These people are held together by their hate, racism, resentment, etc., but they need Trump as glue.
Once Trump is gone, a new coalition of the right will have to be formed, and they are going to try to pivot, rebrand, all that jazz, but GOP will be so disgraced by Trump that I think it will be very difficult. The smart move the GOP made in 1974 was getting rid of Nixon. That took some backbone. Today, there is only spineless capitulation.
Indeed. See my answer above to PhillyGuy, but yeah, it’s as frustrating as hell. Once Trump is gone, these jackasses will be saying, “We’re the party of fiscal probity, law and order, family values, and support for the military!” as if such things are simply the eternal essence of the GOP, regardless of the actual accidents (pun intended). And a lot of dumb mutherfuckers will buy it as always. I do think, however, that Trump will significantly stain and weaken the party for a long time.
Vance is an amoral snake in the grass, and this is just one more thing that makes that apparent, IMO.