The Republican Establishment’s Attitude Toward Trump and Right-Wing Populism, and Their Relationship

The Republican Establishment: A Key Force Behind Trump’s Election and the Implementation of Populist Policies

• The Republican establishment rarely criticizes Trump and the populists; cooperation is the mainstream approach.

• The Republican establishment often concedes to Trump and the populists when disagreements arise.

• The Republican establishment and right-wing populists share fundamental values, with more similarities than differences.

• Since 2016, the Republican establishment has collaborated with the “alt-right” and populists during crises. Their cooperation has been smooth and mutually beneficial.

• Unable to challenge the Democrats alone, the Republican establishment relies heavily on Trump and the populists, forming a united conservative front against progressives.

• The Republican establishment prioritizes core interests over secondary concerns, abandoning previous stances on issues like Russia-Ukraine and alliances to appease Trump and the populists.

• Trump and the populists reciprocate by advancing the conservative political agenda, aligning with their shared values and goals.

• Republican unity boosts electoral victories, while Democratic infighting leads to losses.

• The unique advantages of Trump and the “alt-right”; the Republican right provides platforms and resources for Trump and the populists, paving the way for right-wing populist dominance in the U.S.

• To counter the Democrats and maintain conservative dominance, the Republican establishment supports and tolerates Trump and right-wing populists, even when they act recklessly.

• The Republican establishment’s support for Trump and collaboration with right-wing populists harm U.S. national and public interests, undermine global justice and peace, and hurt vulnerable groups.

• The Republican establishment and its members should be held accountable and condemned for enabling Trump, right-wing populists, and the far right in their misdeeds.

Trump’s Second Term: Shocking Policies and Controversies

Two months into his second presidency, Donald Trump has implemented a series of shocking policies, such as halting nearly all USAID programs and foreign aid projects, launching tariff wars against allies like Europe and Canada, and favoring Russia over Ukraine in the ongoing conflict. He has also made territorial claims over Greenland, Panama, and Canada while expressing disdain for NATO and the United Nations.

Additionally, during both his presidential terms and campaigns, Trump has made numerous crude remarks about women and marginalized groups and has spread a vast number of statements verified as false.

Compared to the 200-year-old tradition of American politics, where political figures generally uphold gentlemanly conduct and statesmanship, Trump’s actions are seen as “radical departures from the norm.” However, it is precisely his unorthodox leadership style and dramatic moves that have won him enthusiastic support from right-wing populist forces under the banner of “MAGA” (Make America Great Again).

Trump’s two election victories were strongly backed by the MAGA movement. After his 2020 defeat, populist rioters supporting Trump stormed the Capitol, causing the infamous “January 6 Insurrection.” The current Vice President, J.D. Vance, is considered one of the representatives of the right-wing populist movement. Billionaire Elon Musk has also played a significant role in Trump’s re-election and has become a highly active political figure in Trump’s second term. Additionally, more extreme far-right groups, including white supremacists and Christian fundamentalists, have overwhelmingly supported Trump.

The Role of the Republican Establishment in Trump’s Rise

But was it solely the right-wing populist movement and the far right that enabled Trump’s rise? In the three presidential elections since 2016, were Trump’s voters and policy supporters limited to right-wing populists and extremists?

The answer is no.

Based on voting patterns in the three presidential elections and the attitudes of Congress and the Supreme Court toward Trump’s policies, it is evident that support for Trump was not limited to MAGA, right-wing populists, or the far right. The vast majority of the Republican establishment—including traditional conservative officials such as vice presidents, secretaries of state, congressional leaders, Supreme Court justices, and even ordinary center-right voters who have consistently supported the Republican Party—also backed Trump’s election and policies.

The combined strength of the Republican establishment and right-wing populists provided the foundation for Trump’s two presidential victories and his ability to implement conservative populist policies.

During the 2016 Republican primaries, establishment figures such as Marco Rubio, John Kasich, and Ted Cruz initially enjoyed strong support. Meanwhile, Trump, a businessman with no political experience, faced criticism from these traditional politicians. Many of their criticisms resembled those later voiced by Democrats—calling Trump vulgar, dishonest, unfit to govern, and even authoritarian.

However, after Trump’s unexpected rise and primary victory, Rubio and other establishment figures abandoned their criticisms, overlooked his flaws, and shifted to supporting him.

Following Trump’s election in November 2016 and his inauguration the next year, congressional Republicans played a crucial role in shielding and advancing his agenda. Policies such as cracking down on illegal immigration and imposing tariffs on various countries, as well as the appointment of several conservative Supreme Court justices, were all approved by the Republican-controlled Congress.

Reviewing congressional voting records, apart from a handful of exceptions like the late Senator John McCain, over 99% of Republican lawmakers in both chambers consistently voted in favor of Trump’s policies and appointments. Meanwhile, most Republican senators opposed the policies of the Biden administration and the Democrats.

Currently, the Supreme Court consists of nine justices, six of whom are conservative, including three appointed by Trump. These justices, along with numerous lower court judges with similar ideologies, have largely upheld Trump’s policies on labor rights, women’s rights, environmental protection, immigration, and trade.

As I have detailed in my article The Long-Term Conservative Shift of the U.S. Supreme Court, the Supreme Court—dominated by conservative justices—has repeatedly struck down executive orders issued during the Biden administration (e.g., vaccine mandates and climate change regulations).

Regarding voter trends, Trump has not only maintained but even increased his vote count and percentage of the U.S. population compared to previous Republican candidates like George W. Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. Since right-wing populists make up only part of the Republican base, this indicates that the vast majority of Republican establishment voters also supported Trump.

The Republican Establishment Rarely Criticizes Trump or the Populists—Cooperation is the Norm

Of course, the Republican establishment has occasionally criticized Trump and the populists, and they are not blindly loyal to Trump at all times.

For example, during the January 6 Capitol riot, Vice President Mike Pence and several Republican officials refused to support the violent actions of the populists and instead worked to ensure a peaceful transfer of power. The conservative-majority Supreme Court also dismissed several baseless lawsuits alleging election fraud.

After Trump’s first term, former officials like Mike Pompeo and John Bolton criticized him. Two months into Trump’s second term, Chief Justice John Roberts publicly condemned Trump’s attempt to impeach federal judges.

However, persistent and strong criticism of Trump from the Republican establishment has been rare. Some critics have only occasionally voiced mild objections. Figures such as Nikki Haley, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have at times opposed Trump on certain issues. Yet, Haley endorsed Trump after losing the GOP primary, Barrett helped overturn Roe v. Wade, and McConnell strongly supported Trump’s first-term agenda.

Conclusion: A United Right-Wing Front

Overall, the Republican establishment and the right-wing populist MAGA movement remain largely united.

In elections, congressional voting, Supreme Court rulings, and intra-party dynamics, there has been no significant or sustained resistance to Trump’s extreme and populist policies. The Republican Party and the broader right-wing coalition continue to cooperate, ensuring that Trump’s influence remains dominant within American conservatism.

The Republican Establishment’s Concessions to Trump and the Populist Faction in Times of Disagreement

When disagreements arise between the populist and establishment factions, it is usually the establishment that yields to the populists. For example, in late February of this year, when Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Vice President J.D. Vance, a representative of the populist faction, criticized Zelensky, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a representative of the establishment, chose to remain silent at the time. Later, in media interviews, Rubio supported Trump and Vance while criticizing Zelensky. Rubio, a long-time foreign policy hawk, had always advocated for a tough stance against Russia and China and supported Ukraine. However, after becoming Trump’s Secretary of State in his second term, he chose to comply with Trump and abandoned his own hardline stance on Russia.

Other establishment figures followed a similar pattern in both domestic and foreign policy, not only refraining from resisting Trump and Vance’s populist policies but also actively supporting and cooperating with them. Even when Trump made highly controversial remarks—such as his claims about annexing Canada and Greenland, which severely damaged America’s reputation and violated international law—the Trump administration and Republican politicians largely remained silent.

Most of the time, especially when confronting Democrats, the Republican establishment sided with the populists and backed Trump’s rhetoric and actions. For example, despite Trump making numerous disastrous decisions in the first two months of his second term, when he delivered his State of the Union address in Congress—boasting about his achievements, proclaiming himself the greatest U.S. president (saying the second greatest was George Washington), and attacking Biden and other Democratic leaders—Republican lawmakers repeatedly applauded and praised him. More fundamentally, in their voting records, daily political activities, and partisan conflicts, the Republican establishment consistently supported Trump, cooperated with the populists, and opposed the Democrats.

The Republican Establishment and Right-Wing Populists Share Core Values, with More Commonalities than Differences

The Republican establishment has taken this stance because, despite some differences with Trump and right-wing populists, they share fundamental interests, core values, and common positions on most policy issues.

Both the Republican establishment and the populist faction are right-wing or conservative. Specifically, they support low taxes, low welfare, small government, strengthening state rights while weakening federal power, Christian conservatism, and “America First” nationalism. They also oppose (or at least do not actively support) feminism, LGBTQ rights, environmental protection and climate crisis mitigation, gun control, affirmative action, diversity, secularism, expanding federal power, and government intervention in the economy. Both factions emphasize individual freedom over equality (whereas Democrats tend to prioritize equality).

Thus, the Republican establishment and populist factions share a common ideological foundation, common values, common interests, and common goals—far more than they have differences. They also share a common enemy: the Democratic Party and its progressive ideology.

Since 2016, the Republican Establishment Has Cooperated with the “Alt-Right”/Populist Faction in Times of Crisis, Leading to Successful Collaboration and Mutual Gains

Moreover, the Republican establishment desperately needs the support of the populists and figures like Trump. In the two presidential elections before 2016, the Republican Party nominated traditional establishment politicians, John McCain and Mitt Romney, both of whom lost to Barack Obama, a grassroots candidate who was widely popular in the U.S. and globally. Polls before the 2016 election also showed that traditional conservative establishment figures like Rubio had significantly lower approval ratings than Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, who represented the progressive left. Even earlier, George W. Bush won two elections, but in 2000, he lost the popular vote despite winning the Electoral College.

Overall, from the late 20th century to around 2020, Democrats held a clear advantage in public opinion. The Republican Party’s traditional establishment politics appeared outdated and uninspiring, failing to appeal to younger generations, while the Democratic Party’s progressive agenda was evidently more popular. Moreover, the U.S. political system operates on a “winner-takes-all” basis, making electoral defeat especially costly for both sides. As a result, the Republican establishment—from top to bottom—felt an immense sense of crisis.

It was in this context that the rise of right-wing populists (or the “alt-right”), who advocated dismantling the political establishment, rejected “political correctness,” spread inflammatory conspiracy theories, and rallied support through extreme nationalism, provided the Republican establishment with a political lifeline. Trump’s unexpected emergence and victory in the 2016 election rapidly elevated the status and influence of both Trump and right-wing populists, making the Republican establishment even more willing—and compelled—to cooperate with them. (Even during the 2016 election campaign, when Trump was not yet widely favored, the Republican establishment clearly supported him, allowing his numerous lies, conspiracy theories, and slanderous attacks on Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to go unchecked, without clarification or condemnation.)

During Trump’s first term, his policies were not as extreme as those in the first two months of his second term. Many of his policies aligned with the interests of the Republican establishment, especially his appointment of three conservative Supreme Court justices, which ensured a conservative judicial foundation in the U.S. for decades. For the Republican establishment and the broader conservative movement, this was an enormous strategic victory.

Thus, from Trump’s 2016 campaign, through his four years in office, to his third presidential campaign and re-election in 2024, the Republican establishment has largely tolerated, indulged, and sometimes actively supported Trump, despite his numerous scandals, habitual lying, and extreme domestic and foreign policies. The only exception came when Trump, after losing the 2020 election, falsely claimed election fraud and incited the January 6 insurrection. At that moment, the Republican establishment chose not to support his refusal to concede or his call for violence. However, they never completely severed ties with Trump.

From 2021 to 2023, the Republican establishment maintained a cautious distance from Trump, neither fully embracing him nor outright rejecting him. During this period, they were still assessing whether to continue their close alliance with Trump or to select a new candidate more aligned with their preferences.

However, in the 2024 Republican primary, Trump once again emerged as the nominee. This reflected both the establishment’s lack of a strong alternative and their unwillingness to abandon Trump. Instead, they took the calculated risk of backing a man known for his erratic behavior and incitement of political violence to represent the party once more. The 2024 election results ultimately validated the Republican establishment’s pragmatic choice.

The Republican Establishment Lacks the Strength to Challenge Democrats Alone, Relies Heavily on Trump and the Populist Faction, and Has United with the Far-Right to Combat Progressive Forces

During Joe Biden’s four years in office, the Republican establishment failed to find a leader capable of uniting the party, rallying the broader conservative movement, defeating the Democrats, and reclaiming the presidency. Figures like Rubio, Cruz, and Haley lacked the stature to take on such a role. Only Trump, with his unique style and ability to mobilize populist support, remained a viable option, especially since most of his policy positions aligned with the establishment.

At the same time, the Republican establishment strongly opposed Biden and the Democrats’ policies on women’s rights, racial equality, labor rights, federal power expansion, climate crisis mitigation, and equitable access to education and healthcare. (Right-wing populists, of course, were even more vehemently opposed to most of these policies.) The Republican establishment alone was powerless to counter these Democratic initiatives.

For the Republican establishment, compared to their deep-seated hostility toward the Democrats, leftists, and progressives, Trump and the populists were the lesser evil. Whether moderate conservatives or the far-right, whether the Republican establishment or the populists, their fundamental ideology was the same—preserving American traditions and the status quo. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party’s ideology was the opposite—pushing progress, adapting to modern realities, and dismantling outdated traditions.

The fundamental similarities and differences in ideology determine that the Republican establishment would rather ally with the populists, support Trump, and even cooperate with far-right racial supremacists and religious extremists/fundamentalists than compromise with the Democrats or support figures like Hillary Clinton. Meanwhile, as the Democratic Party has shifted further left with the rise of far-left forces, the Republican establishment has become even more intolerant and feels an even greater sense of crisis.

The conservative sense of crisis and disdain for progressivism can be understood from the speeches and writings of many conservative figures. For example, conservative Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito expressed dissatisfaction with progressive “political correctness” in a speech at a conservative gathering and emphasized the importance of America’s Christian founding principles. This sentiment is shared by nearly all Republicans and various conservative factions. Conservative organizations like The Heritage Foundation have also expressed similar views, reflecting their core positions. To defeat progressives, the right-wing establishment does not care about Trump’s poor character; for the sake of long-term political ideals and goals, they can be extremely pragmatic and ruthless in the short term.

Thus, the renewed cooperation between the Republican establishment and the populists, the grand unity of right-wing forces, their collective push to elect Trump as president, support his administration, suppress left-wing forces (both far-left and center-left), and block the Democrats’ progressive policies all become logical outcomes.

The Republican Establishment Abandons Secondary Concerns to Protect Core Interests, Sacrificing Positions on Russia-Ukraine and Allies to Appease Trump and the Populists

To maintain right-wing unity, the Republican establishment has been willing to make many concessions to Trump and the populists. Traditionally, the Republican establishment has been strongly anti-Russian due to Cold War grievances with the Soviet Union, post-Cold War containment strategies against Russia, the desire to maintain U.S. global hegemony, and the defense of the free world. The Republican Party has historically been more anti-Russian than the Democratic Party. After the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war, Republicans also supported the Biden administration’s policy of aiding Ukraine and opposing Russia. However, after Trump’s second election, the right-wing establishment chose to remain silent or even support Trump’s pro-Russia, anti-Ukraine policies. Although the Republican establishment is generally anti-Russia and supportive of Ukraine, this is not a core interest for them and can be sacrificed as a secondary concern.

Similarly, in terms of relations with traditional allies such as Europe and Canada, the Republican establishment—long focused on alliances with liberal democracies—has tolerated Trump and the populists’ attacks on allies. The Republican Party also values free trade and generally opposes protectionism, but to avoid internal party conflicts and secure populist support, they have chosen to back Trump’s trade wars and high tariffs. Cutting funding for human rights organizations like USAID, halting support for Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, all contradict the Republican establishment’s longstanding anti-authoritarian stance and its self-proclaimed role as the “beacon of freedom.” Yet, the establishment has again chosen to compromise with Trump and populist figures like Elon Musk.

(However, even before Trump, the Republican establishment already had significant ideological and policy differences with the establishment in Europe and Canada. The differences with left-wing parties in these countries are self-evident, but even center-right parties in Europe and Canada appear “leftist” to the Republican establishment, as the overall U.S. political spectrum is more right-leaning than Europe’s. Therefore, not only do far-right American populists resent European establishment politicians, but the Republican establishment itself does not fully align with mainstream establishment parties in the UK, France, Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. The Republican establishment is not emotionally opposed to Trump and the populists targeting European establishment figures and the center-left Liberal Party-led government in Canada. This is yet another area of common ground between the Republican establishment and the populists.)

Trump and the Populists “Repay” the Republican Establishment by Advancing Conservative Policies, Aligning with Shared Values and Goals, and Finding Common Ground on Divisive Issues

Of course, Trump and the populists have made many decisions that pleased the Republican establishment in return. In terms of personnel appointments, most of Trump’s first-term cabinet members came from the Republican establishment, and many were highly conservative, even far-right figures. Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were both deeply conservative, with Pompeo being a key member of the Tea Party, a conservative libertarian movement active during the Obama era. In his second term, Trump appointed more populist figures (or establishment figures with strong populist tendencies), such as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. However, the establishment still held a significant share of positions, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a key establishment right-wing figure. That said, Trump’s second-term establishment appointees were more marginalized figures within the right-wing (those previously far from the center of power, with extreme-right views) and were more personally loyal to Trump. Examples include Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

On policy, Trump pursued many initiatives that both the right-wing establishment and the populists supported, such as overturning Roe v. Wade to eliminate federal protections for abortion rights, halting climate change mitigation policies and expanding fossil fuel development, ending vaccine mandates, abolishing the Department of Education, banning transgender surgeries, cracking down on undocumented immigration and mass deportations, and significantly increasing the use of the death penalty. In foreign policy, strong support for Israel and other right-wing regimes, pressure on left-wing governments like Cuba’s, opposition to China’s rising global influence, and an “America First” diplomatic approach all aligned with the Republican establishment’s long-standing stance. Trump did not need to make special concessions; many of his policies naturally aligned with the establishment’s goals.

On issues where the Republican establishment and the populists initially differed, they gradually converged or one side yielded. For example, the establishment traditionally supported globalization, advocating for a U.S.-led global order, economic interdependence, and international cooperation. Right-wing populists, on the other hand, opposed globalization due to nationalism, protectionism, and xenophobia. However, as populist influence grew among the American public and as the Democratic establishment strongly supported globalization while emerging economies like China benefited more from it, the Republican establishment gradually shifted toward an anti-globalization stance, accepting populist trade protectionist policies and Trump’s high tariffs.

Regarding labor rights and welfare, right-wing populists, who are predominantly lower-middle-class whites, originally favored labor protections, increased welfare, and greater material and policy subsidies—positions closer to left-wing populists and the Democratic establishment. In contrast, the Republican establishment favored low welfare, weak labor protections, minimal subsidies, and unrestricted free-market competition. However, after Trump and other Republicans redirected working-class frustrations toward foreigners, undocumented immigrants, and Democratic policies, right-wing populists abandoned most of their welfare demands and accepted the Republican establishment’s low-welfare, anti-labor-rights, and reduced agricultural subsidy policies—even though these policies hurt their own economic interests. For right-wing populists, racial and anti-immigrant sentiments outweighed material benefits. Some lower-income voters were also misled by Trump and right-wing politicians, unaware that supporting the Republican Party harmed their own interests.

Additionally, the lines between the Republican establishment and populists are often blurred rather than strictly distinct. For instance, current Vice President J.D. Vance was long part of the Republican establishment, but after running alongside Trump, he adopted more populist rhetoric. Figures like former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former National Security Advisor John Bolton also exhibit both establishment and populist characteristics. At the grassroots level, many Republicans hold a mix of establishment and populist traits, making their integration relatively seamless. This ease of cooperation has strengthened Republican unity.

Republican Unity Leads to Victory, Democratic Infighting Leads to Defeat

The unity between the Republican establishment and populists, their shared values and policy priorities, and the establishment’s willingness to compromise on divisive issues were crucial to Trump’s two presidential victories (especially in the 2024 election).

In contrast, the Democratic Party and the progressive camp are far from united. The Democratic Party is also divided between the establishment and populist factions, as well as the far-left and center-left, with several subgroups and identity-based coalitions. The far-left is mostly populist, while the center-left is largely establishment-oriented. The far-left populists are dissatisfied with Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris, particularly on issues such as feminism, LGBTQ rights, racial equality for Black and other minority groups, wealth redistribution, and the Palestinian issue. They resent the Democratic establishment/center-left’s conciliatory policies on these matters, often expressing their frustration by abstaining from voting or even switching to support Trump and the Republican Party. This lack of unity and mobilization has made the Democratic Party significantly weaker than the Republican Party, which was a key factor in its two losses in three presidential elections (even though Hillary won the popular vote, her margin was not overwhelming).

(Of course, the Democratic Party’s internal strife and the far-left’s “boycotting” of the mainstream faction should not be overly criticized. Many far-left and centrist Democrats belong to marginalized or vulnerable groups, such as the LGBTQ community and Arab/Palestinian immigrants. Their goal is merely to achieve equal rights with mainstream groups—for instance, LGBTQ individuals seeking the same rights and safety as cisgender heterosexuals, or those opposing military aid to Israel’s actions against their Palestinian kin. The Democratic establishment’s policies, while pragmatic, still fail to achieve full equality and continue to support Israel militarily. Given their trauma and vulnerability, their anger at injustice and refusal to vote is understandable. Meanwhile, most Republicans belong to dominant or privileged groups and do not bear significant trauma. Instead, they often redirect internal conflicts into attacks on weaker external groups to shift pressure and harm others, which allows them to unite more easily and focus on core goals. Thus, it is not fair to simply conclude that Democrats lack a sense of unity.)

From a pragmatic perspective, the Republican establishment’s strategy of uniting with right-wing populists and supporting Trump has been highly successful. During Obama’s presidency, the Republican Party was seen as a rigid, outdated, and declining political force with little future. Figures like John McCain and Mitt Romney, despite being conservative gentlemen, lacked appeal. Meanwhile, Obama, Hillary, and the Democratic Party were riding a wave of momentum, with progressive policies gaining widespread popularity, especially among young voters. At that time, some even believed the Democratic Party would dominate U.S. politics for decades, with progressive policies advancing unimpeded.

The Unique Advantage and Value of Trump and the “Alt-Right”; The Republican Right’s Support as the Foundation for Populist Power

Trump and the rise of populism/the “alt-right” leveraged the internet and other platforms to stir public opinion, disregarding traditional political norms and the constraints of “political correctness.” This shook the U.S. political order and dealt a heavy blow to the Democratic Party and progressives. However, right-wing populism alone was not enough to defeat the Democrats. The turning point was when the Republican establishment chose to unconditionally support Trump and the populist faction. By merging forces, the establishment gained more supporters and votes, including many devoted and enthusiastic backers, while the populist faction, with establishment support, gained massive resources and access to platforms previously out of reach. They moved from the political fringes to the center of power, transitioning from online and street movements to occupying the White House and Congress, further strengthening their influence.

Thus, the alliance between the Republican establishment and right-wing populists, combined with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and the global rise of far-right populism, achieved something that most people (including most political analysts) had never imagined: Trump, a man of poor character and a complete disregard for political norms, defeated the experienced and well-regarded (but too elitist to resonate with grassroots voters) Hillary Clinton. The Republican Party overwhelmed the Democrats, and the conservative movement reclaimed the presidency after eight years. Moreover, the Republican Party also secured majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Later, Trump appointed three conservative Supreme Court justices, most notably replacing the late progressive Ruth Bader Ginsburg with conservative Amy Coney Barrett. This created a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court, an advantage that could last for decades. This impact on American politics, the judiciary, and everyday life is arguably even more profound than Trump’s two presidential victories. Had Hillary won and appointed three progressive justices instead, the Supreme Court’s ideological direction would have been completely reversed, dramatically influencing America’s policies and the lives of its citizens for decades.

The Republican Establishment’s Calculated Support for Trump and Right-Wing Populism

The Republican establishment fully understood that their unprecedented reversal and success came from uniting with right-wing populists and nominating Trump, a unique figure, as their candidate. Naturally, they were determined to continue this alliance. Trump, after all, was the “savior” who rescued the Republican Party from decline and restored the strength of the conservative movement. As a result, the party gave him near-unconditional support, ignoring his many flaws, including his moral failings and even alleged criminal behavior.

It is worth noting that in the 2020 election, Trump received even more votes than in 2016. He only lost because Biden secured even more votes, particularly by winning over a significant number of centrist voters. Nevertheless, most Republicans—both establishment and populist—still supported Trump. Although there were some anti-Trump and anti-populist voices within the party after his 2020 defeat, they remained relatively small and limited their criticism to certain issues rather than outright rejecting Trump.

In the 2024 election, the united Republican establishment and populist faction once again propelled Trump to the presidency. Even though Republican leaders were well aware that Trump’s governance could harm U.S. interests—through his personalist rule, pro-Russia stance, favoritism in appointments, and other issues—they still chose to support him and campaigned vigorously on his behalf.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party was clearly not as united. In particular, traditional Democratic-supporting groups such as the far left and Muslims, angered by the party’s pro-Israel stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict (even though the Republicans were even more pro-Israel), chose to abstain from voting or even turned to Trump in frustration (or out of a desire to explore a different approach to the Israel-Palestine issue). Additionally, Harris, unlike Biden, failed to win strong support from centrists and the working class, leading to a significant drop in votes.

As a result, Trump, representing the Republican Party, defeated Kamala Harris of the Democratic Party and even won the popular vote, securing his return to the White House.

The Republican Establishment’s Tolerance and Support for Trump’s Extremism

Having reaped the immense benefits of uniting with populists and supporting Trump, the Republican establishment had every reason to continue this strategy. Over the past two months of Trump’s presidency, figures like Trump, J.D. Vance, and Elon Musk have engaged in numerous controversial and disruptive actions, pushing highly destructive policies. The reason these policies have sailed through Congress with near-unanimous support and have been aggressively implemented by local officials and party operatives is precisely because of the Republican establishment’s backing. Most Republican establishment figures may not be as outspoken or flamboyant as Musk and other populists, but when it comes to voting, legislating, and policymaking, they quietly but actively support and enforce Trump’s agenda.

Over the next four years, barring any major unforeseen circumstances, the Republican establishment will continue to back Trump and right-wing populists on most issues, even if disagreements arise. Many previously staunch pro-Ukraine Republicans, such as Senator Lindsey Graham, have chosen to either align with Trump’s pro-Russia, anti-Ukraine stance or remain silent. The Republican establishment’s increasing support, coordination, and concessions to Trump and populism will continue in a discreet but firm manner.

The Republican establishment’s strategy of courting, uniting, and supporting the far-right populist movement, as well as tolerating Trump’s extreme policies, was a calculated move in response to the party’s existential crisis. From the perspective of Republican interests, right-wing goals, and pure political pragmatism, this strategy has been highly effective—turning a dire situation in 2016 into a victory, reviving the American conservative movement, and securing power for the Republican Party.

The Republican Establishment’s Support for Trump and Cooperation with Right-Wing Populism Harm U.S. National and Public Interests, Undermine Global Justice and Peace, and Oppress Vulnerable Groups

From the perspective of overall U.S. national interests, the long-term well-being of the majority of its citizens, moral right and wrong, political ethics, universal values, and the impact on global peace and democracy, the actions of the Republican establishment have significantly fueled Trump and the right-wing populist movement. Their support has contributed to the erosion of the liberal democratic system, the destruction of domestic and international rules and fairness, and the weakening of justice. This behavior is selfish, narrow-minded, unwise, and unjust.

From a left-wing progressive standpoint, the Republican establishment has become an accomplice to the wrongdoing of Trump and the right-wing and far-right forces, causing serious harm to women, LGBT individuals, racial minorities, immigrants, and refugees. Furthermore, their actions have obstructed progressive initiatives such as equal access to education and healthcare, climate change mitigation, and global peace and justice. They are participants in numerous transgressions.

Regardless of objective reasoning or my personal opinion, I hold a critical stance toward the Republican establishment’s support for Trump and its collaboration with right-wing populist and far-right forces.

While their cooperation with Trump may be understandable from the perspective of the Republican Party’s self-interest and the values of American right-wing conservatism, it has played a complicit role in Trump and right-wing populists dismantling the once relatively principled and rule-based nature of U.S. domestic politics. It has also contributed to the breakdown of the international order, which is based on rules and agreements, and a shift toward a global landscape dominated by brute force and the law of the jungle. In this grand context, the Republican establishment has unquestionably acted as an enabler, forming an alliance of mutual exploitation with Trump, Musk, and other populist figures.

Without the support of the Republican establishment, Trump would not have had a viable platform to run for office, nor would he have secured enough votes to become president. The populist right and far-right forces would not have gained mainstream legitimacy, nor would various extreme populist policies have been smoothly implemented. If even one-third of the Republican establishment had resisted Trump and his populist allies—such as by voting against his unjust and unreasonable policies in Congress or at least abstaining—Trump would not have been able to act with impunity as president. However, in reality, the Republican establishment has provided Trump with resources, platforms, and various forms of assistance, effectively shielding his policies. While conservative establishment figures have occasionally criticized and blocked some of Trump’s actions—such as conservative judges overturning certain executive orders—these rare instances of opposition do not outweigh their overall support and complicity in reactionary policies.

The Republican Establishment and Its Members Must Be Condemned and Held Accountable for Enabling Trump and Right-Wing Extremism

Of course, neither I personally nor the nearly half of the American population who oppose Trump—nor people and political forces around the world—can alter the Republican establishment’s decision to support Trump and ally with right-wing populists and far-right elements. As the world’s most powerful nation, the United States now has its executive, legislative, and judicial branches, as well as federal law enforcement and state machinery, entirely controlled by the Republican Party. Their ability to act as they please is virtually unchecked. This is a tragedy for America and a misfortune for all of humanity, bringing real harm to people worldwide in various forms of disaster.

The Republican establishment and every individual involved in its actions must be condemned and held accountable for this tragedy. While such condemnation and accountability may be difficult to enforce through legal or practical means, beyond the realm of law and reality, there still exists the fundamental moral conscience of humanity.

Wang Qingmin

March 24, 2025

233rd Year of the Republican Calendar, Bud Month, Tulip Day