Cal Hates the New RIght

Watching the Vice Presidential debate last night, it became clear that the MAGA movement is evolving. JD Vance was polished and articulate, presented himself as a suitable heir to Donald Trump’s populist legacy. This made me realize that we are beginning to see what I am calling the “New Right” and that it could be a powerful political force for decades to come. While the chaotic Trump era may eventually fade, the strategies it introduced—appealing to the emotions of voters and manipulating the truth—seem poised to remain central to the future of American politics.

When people think of Donald Trump, several characteristics typically come to mind: chaos, unpredictability, and a casual disregard for the truth. Yet, Trump rose to political prominence because of these very traits, not in spite of them. His ability to exploit misinformation and foster distrust in traditional media is arguably one of his most lasting political legacies. By repeating the same falsehoods, he managed to persuade millions to believe in an alternate reality, one where fact-checking is irrelevant, and ideology trumps evidence.

Trump’s recent debate performance was classic Trump—combative, provocative, and filled with statements that invited scrutiny. However, it was clear that he lacked a coherent grasp of policy. He’s an opportunist, telling voters what they want to hear, often contradicting himself from one group to another. His appeal to working-class voters, in particular, comes from his perceived role as a fighter against the establishment. Even when he contradicts himself or fails to deliver on his promises, many of his supporters remain loyal, appreciating his populist rhetoric and the raw spectacle of his political style.

But last night’s debate was different. JD Vance, while embracing many of the same policy positions and controversial talking points as Trump—such as false claims about late-term abortions and healthcare—did so in a way that felt calculated and polished. He sounded plausible, even reasonable, which is precisely what makes this new generation of right-wing leaders potentially more dangerous. They are not the bombastic, unpredictable figures like Trump. Instead, they are articulate, well-groomed, and packaged to appeal to a broader audience. In this sense, the next wave of conservative politicians may be more effective at mainstreaming misinformation simply because they present it in a more palatable form.

What concerns me most is that in an era where truth has already been severely eroded, these more polished candidates may fly under the radar, avoiding the level of scrutiny that Trump endured. This isn’t just about policy—it’s about the ability to blur the line between fact and fiction, to manipulate public discourse, and to get away with it. Vance’s performance showed that the exhaustion many feel from Trump’s constant stream of falsehoods could make it easier for a new generation to spread those same ideas without facing the same level of public skepticism.

Of course, there are uncertainties about how this will unfold. For one, it’s unclear whether Trump will ever truly fade from the political stage. His eventual departure, whenever it happens, will likely be as chaotic as his political career, and it could take the entire Republican Party down with him. Or, perhaps there is something unique about Trump’s persona—the spectacle, the unpredictability—that captures the working-class vote. Without Trump, maybe the Republican coalition that he built will start to fracture.

There’s also the possibility that without the drama and chaos Trump brings to the stage, some voters may become disengaged. Vance’s performance, while professional, was far less entertaining than Trump’s bombastic style. There is a chance that many supporters are drawn more to the theater of Trump’s rallies and debates than to the policy positions themselves. Without that energy, Republicans might struggle to maintain the momentum that Trump ignited.

Even if Kamala Harris wins the presidency in November, we are not out of the woods. The rise of polished, articulate candidates within a movement that often plays fast and loose with the truth is a serious threat to our democratic discourse. It is crucial that we work to rebuild trust in our institutions and hold those who spread misinformation accountable. The next generation of political leaders will test whether we can restore integrity to the public square, or whether deceit, wrapped in a more presentable package, will continue to dominate.

Ultimately, the future of American politics depends not only on who wins elections but also on whether we, as citizens, demand honesty and accountability from our leaders. The battle for truth in politics is far from over, and we must remain vigilant in calling out falsehoods, regardless of how well-packaged they may be.

October 2, 2024