“For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard” — Shakespeare, Hamlet
The curtain has yet to open on Trump’s second White House stint, but already the MAGA faithful are predicting a 1,000-year Reich. Just kidding (I think). But the cult does dream of Trumpism outlasting Trump. They need to. Because their boy isn’t going to be around long. He is the 78-year-old son of a father who died of Atzheimer’s — a physician reported that, at 86, Fred Trump "did not know his birth date [or] age” — and the condition is hereditary. Meanwhile, Trump’s obvious cognitive decline is picking up pace.
In an opinion piece for The Hill, ‘Democrats are looking at a dozen years in the wilderness’ Douglass MacKinnon promotes the inevitable continuation of MAGA in younger hands. His reasoning is pure hubris seasoned with wishful thinking and misplaced optimism. No one has a crystal ball. And MacKinnon bases his prediction of MAGA longevity on JD Vance engendering the same enthusiasm from the base his boss does. If any reader is unclear on what ‘magical thinking’ means, this is a nonpareil example of the affliction.
Let’s take a closer look.
We should consider the author’s bias. MacKinnon goes way back in Republican circles. He worked for Ronald Reagan, then George HW Bush as a ‘writer’ — and had done other Republican stuff since. If he were ever a ‘never-Trumper,’ he is now a committed fanboy for the incompetent fascist. Ergo, we should not expect a sober-minded analysis. And we don’t get one.
The piece starts with a rhetorical formula that was already hackneyed when God was a boy.
“Did you hear the one about the “common sense, pragmatic” Democrats who stood up to the far-left cabal within their own party?
No? Neither did I.”
Not only is the “No? Neither did I” gag flaccid. But pointing the finger at the supposed progressive takeover of the Democratic Party as the reason for Trump’s win is simplistic laziness. Harris campaigned from the middle — with nary a pronoun in sight. She did not win. Obviously, there are reasons for that. But MacKinnon leads with a lie because that’s his default position.
MacKinnon then gloms onto a Democratic Representative, Ritchie Torres, who tweeted something Doug agreed with.
“And neither, apparently, has Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), who posted on X right after the election:
‘Donald Trump has no greater friend than the far left, which has managed to alienate historic numbers of Latinos, Blacks, Asians, and Jews from the Democratic Party with absurdities like ‘Defund the Police’ or ‘From the River to the Sea’ or ‘Latinx.’ There is more to lose than there is to gain politically from pandering to a far left that is more representative of Twitter, Twitch, and TikTok than it is of the real world. The working class is not buying the ivory-towered nonsense that the far left is selling’.”
I don’t know Torres’ deal. But he is an anomaly. He represents a very blue district — he won in 2024 with 77% of the vote. However, his enthusiasm for Israel is biblical — so he hates The Squad. And he is an uber fan of cryptocurrency. Most importantly, he is one voice. And anecdotes are not evidence
However, despite the fact MacKinnon features this internecine squabble, it is poor support for his argument the Democrats are done for 12 years. Even if he were right about the Democratic policy failure in 2024, no one can predict the Democratic positions in 2026, let alone down the road. The Democrats themselves do not even know who will drive their media/social media presence next year.
MacKinnon seems to realize he needs more than old chestnuts and one Democratic dissenter to present a robust argument. He turns to the ‘Trump is so great, MAGA is inevitable’ dogma. He writes:
It can also be argued that the non-“common sense, pragmatic” part of the Democratic leadership and the “far-left” that Torres took to task are now petrified of one thing: Trump succeeding across the board.
Should he do so — and I believe he is about to achieve one major success after another — the percentage of voters from the communities the Democrats count on for success is going to shrink dramatically as it transfers to the Trump side of the ledger. The “Trump side” being a very important distinction.
First a comment on style. The passive voice, “It can also be argued”, is wishy-washy. A real man or woman wouldn’t qualify their opinions. They would have started the paragraph: “the non-“common sense, pragmatic” part of the Democratic leadership and the “far-left” that Torres took to task are now petrified of one thing”.
Worse for his argument is his hopeful belief that Trump will “achieve one major success after another”. We have the evidence of Trump’s first term. He succeeded at shit, except to give the rich a tax cut. Now the dotard is four years older and ten yards slower. I predict he’ll lose the House in 2026, just like he did in 2018. My evidence? The president’s party almost always loses seats and the GOP only has to lose three to give up the majority.
Wait till Americans feel the effects of Trump’s policies. If he succeeds we’ll have a sales tax on imports and unpicked produce. Who’s going to like that? if he fails, he’s a failure.
After some chat about how traditional Democratic voters love Trump despite hating Republicans, MacKinnon deals with the elephant in the elephant party. What happens when Trump’s term is up?
“So, what,” some from the failed far-left Democratic leadership might say. “Trump can only serve for four years and then he is out of office permanently.”
This is where Doug gets truly nutty. He extols the political virtues of JD Vance.
True. But who did he pick as his vice president?
The answer, of course, is Vice President-elect JD Vance. While the far-left of the Democratic Party obviously knows that, do they truly understand what it means? I am willing to bet that Torres has given it a great deal of thought.
Point number one with regard to Vance is that Trump picked him because he wanted someone who would carry on his agenda beyond the next four years. In Vance, Trump got a vice president who not only deeply believes in that Trump agenda, but often doubles down on it — an agenda, remember, that already appeals to a great many voters from those Democratic voting blocs.
Oh, dear. First, people may have thought they were voting for an agenda. But they were voting for an entertainer.
Second, by 2028 people will have seen the agenda in action. It won’t be pretty.
Third, JD Vance makes ex-VP and 2000 presidential candidate Al Gore look like Robin Williams. And that stiff plank was running on a booming economy.
MacKinnon goes on to point out that:
- Vance is only 40. Which means nothing if you are unelectable.
- He has a compelling rags-to-riches story — Hillbilly Elegy. So what? The ex-(not very good) venture capitalist will have been an eager lap dog for billionaires come the next general election
- Mrs. Usha Chilukuri Vance is a vote-getter. WTF?
Of Vance’s wife, MacKinnon writes
Not only is she a highly accomplished Yale Law School-educated lawyer — having clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts before moving on to an incredibly successful law career — but she, like her husband, is instantly relatable to millions of Americans, who see so much of themselves in the incoming “Second Lady.”
They do? I would be willing to bet that 99% of Americans don’t even know her name. Perhaps she is a charismatic and compelling presence. But so far she has hidden her light under a bushel. And what part of her life story will Americans see in themselves? Besides, when was the last time anyone voted for or against a presidential candidate because of their spouse?
Trumpism and MAGA exist because Trump has the fatal attraction found in successful populist politicians and other cult leaders. I cannot say that the Republicans are doomed. But if their future rests on MacKinnon’s logic, their outlook is not rosy. Especially if you consider that the 12-year MAGA clock started in 2016.
