re: Best outcome of MAGA longterm?

I think Trump meant well, but I’m kind of let down so far. From neocons, tech bros, Trump lying about the Epstein files, Pam Bondi/Kash Patel to not going hard enough on his enemies, I think the movement itself has been compromised.
And where’s that big, beautiful border wall we were once promised?

The good news is that the next swing to the right after the Democrats likely win in 2026/2028 will make MAGA look as tame as the Reagan administration.

quote:

---

And where’s that big, beautiful border wall we were once promised?

---

quote:

---

Yes, the U.S. is actively building new sections of a border wall and reinforcing existing ones, using new funding from the "One Big Beautiful Bill" and unspent money from previous administrations. Construction is underway or planned in several areas, including Texas, California, Arizona, and New Mexico, to close gaps and complete the system with additional features like secondary fencing, cameras, and lighting, sometimes referred to as a "Smart Wall" system.

---

You can keep up with neocons, tech bros and Epstein bullshite but this easily found information escapes you?

America First > MAGA

quote:

---

WTF is MAGA in terms of policy?

---

Trying to pin down “MAGA policy” isn’t possible, and it doesn’t need to be, because it’s a populist movement. Every time you think you’ve found a principle, it flips when Trump flips, and nothing inside the movement cracks because the positions were never the glue. Positions change, explanations change, villains rotate. None of that matters because the content was never the core.

What holds it together is a sense of grievance and the idea that whatever Trump does is automatically justified, because the movement defines itself as opposition to whoever they think is running their lives behind the curtain. Once that mindset is in place, consistency stops being a requirement. This is how populist movements function.

If you attempt to judge it by stated beliefs, you’ll get the marketing pitch. If you judge it by whatever they’re saying this month, you’ll get a handful of fresh talking points. And if you judge it by actual governing decisions, you get whatever seems useful in the moment. The pattern looks chaotic only if you expect policy to matter. But if you assume they’re chasing emotional impact instead of coherent governance, the noise suddenly makes sense: it’s about producing moments, conflicts, and headlines that reinforce the story they’re telling themselves about who they are and who they’re fighting.

The point isn’t the outcome; it’s the confrontation. The focus on spectacle over substance is common to populist movements in general, where political meaning comes from the intensity of the drama rather than the effectiveness of the plan.

At its core, it’s about belonging to a team that sees itself locked in an epic struggle against an evil force. Exhibit A is Qanon. “Policies” are just props for the story, and that’s why they can be swapped out, ignored, or reversed overnight. The loyalty is to the identity, not the platform. The platform drifts because the story is what people are actually buying. It’s a worldview that depends on conflict to stay alive, just like other populist movements throughout history, so the conflict has to keep moving, and the “policy” just follows along.

Is Mexico still paying for it? Is Hillary Clinton in jail?