The Establishment Strikes Back? Weighing Influence in Trump’s Second Term

Reports of the Republican establishment’s demise have been, to quote Mark Twain, greatly exaggerated. While President Donald Trump’s second term has undeniably seen a surge of hard-line ideologues, devoted loyalists, and recent converts filling key positions, suggesting a monolithic "MAGA" White House, a closer examination reveals a more nuanced reality. Certain figures, representing more traditional GOP viewpoints, continue to wield significant influence, successfully navigating the internal power struggles and, in some instances, even steering Trump’s policies in directions they favor.

The presence and growing influence of these establishment-aligned individuals highlight a continuing tension within the administration, a tug-of-war between those advocating for radical, transformative change and those seeking a more measured, conventional approach. This dynamic is particularly evident in economic and foreign policy, where the hardliners’ dominance isn’t as absolute as in areas like immigration or culture wars.

Consider the case of Scott Bessent, a financier with deep ties to Wall Street, whom Trump appointed as Treasury Secretary. Initially, Bessent seemed overwhelmed by the president’s impulsive "Liberation Day" tariffs, which were widely criticized as economically unsound. He appeared helpless to curb Trump’s enthusiasm for protectionist measures, a stance that alienated allies and threatened global trade. However, Bessent eventually managed to convince Trump to pause the implementation of many of these tariffs. Since then, he has assumed a leading role in the administration’s trade negotiations, effectively sidelining hardliners like Peter Navarro, at least temporarily. This shift demonstrates the power of reasoned argument and persuasive maneuvering within the Trump White House. Bessent’s influence even extended to internal personnel decisions; he successfully challenged Elon Musk, persuading Trump to retract an acting IRS commissioner appointment that Musk had orchestrated without Bessent’s knowledge. This episode illustrates how individuals with establishment connections can utilize their access and relationships to push back against the more unconventional elements within the administration.

Similarly, Marco Rubio, a more traditionally hawkish Republican who serves as Secretary of State, has defied expectations and carved out a space for himself within the Trump administration. From the outset, Rubio faced skepticism and predictions of his imminent dismissal. Early setbacks seemed to confirm these doubts, as Musk’s actions undermined USAID, real estate developer Steve Witkoff took over foreign negotiations, and Vice President JD Vance helped derail a crucial minerals deal with Ukraine that Rubio had championed. This deal, representing an effort by hawks to sway Trump toward a more supportive posture toward Ukraine, initially appeared dead in the water.

However, Rubio’s fortunes have turned. When Trump suddenly required an interim National Security Advisor, he turned to Rubio, entrusting him with two of the administration’s most important foreign policy roles. Moreover, Rubio secured White House approval to dismiss Pete Marocco, the hardliner who had overseen the USAID cuts, an act described by a Politico source as "the first MAGA world killing from inside the White House." Most significantly, the US-Ukraine minerals deal, once seemingly lost, was finally finalized.

The resurgence of Bessent and Rubio suggests a broader pattern. In contrast to the areas where hardliners hold sway, economic and foreign policy are arenas where competing factions actively vie for Trump’s approval. Trump himself appears ambivalent, not fully committed to a "full MAGA" administration on these fronts. While he is drawn to disruption and drama, he sometimes reverts to establishment figures like Rubio and Bessent to stabilize situations that have become too chaotic.

The current dynamic differs significantly from Trump’s first administration. Then, the establishment pushback was often characterized by outright defiance, reflecting a more tenuous grip on the Republican party leadership. For instance, National Economic Council chair Gary Cohn famously removed trade papers from Trump’s desk to prevent him from signing them and triggering a crisis. This time, Trump signed the "Liberation Day" papers, leading to a crisis, but the response was different. Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick reportedly waited until Peter Navarro was absent from a key meeting and then successfully urged Trump to lift some of the tariffs.

The key distinction lies in the approach. Cohn took unilateral action, believing Trump was incapable of making sound decisions. Bessent and Lutnick, in contrast, accepted Trump’s role as the ultimate decision-maker, focusing instead on persuading him to choose what they considered a better course of action. A similar shift is evident in foreign policy. During Trump’s first term, figures like John Bolton appeared to prioritize their own policy preferences over Trump’s stated goals. Top Defense Department officials repeatedly obstructed Trump’s efforts to withdraw troops from Syria and Afghanistan.

Rubio, on the other hand, has emphasized his role as a team player, supporting even controversial policies such as deporting people to an El Salvador prison and revoking the visas of foreign students critical of Israel. When Trump criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Rubio echoed his sentiments. However, the blowup with Vance and Zelenskyy did not result in a complete breakdown of US-Ukraine relations, as many in the MAGA base desired. The minerals deal was revived, and Trump has adopted a more critical stance toward Putin, attributing some blame for the prolonged war to the Russian president.

While it would be an overstatement to declare a GOP establishment victory, it is undeniable that they retain a pulse within the Trump administration and can still influence the president’s decisions, preventing him from fully embracing a "MAGA" agenda, at least sometimes. Trump has undoubtedly shifted policy away from establishment preferences in areas like tariffs and relations with Russia and Ukraine, and he retains the power to reinstate chaos at any moment. However, the ongoing presence and occasional successes of figures like Bessent and Rubio demonstrate that the establishment remains a force to be reckoned with, capable of persuading Trump that moderation and conventional approaches have their merits. Their continued influence underscores the complexity of the Trump administration and suggests that the narrative of a monolithic "MAGA" White House is incomplete.