By David E. Sanger
The recent series of Cabinet appointments by President-elect Donald Trump completed what his team described as a cohesive, loyal, MAGA-oriented administration. However, a closer look reveals at least three distinct camps and a spectrum of ideologies, only just kept in check to navigate the confirmation hurdles.
One faction aims for retribution, spearheaded by potential appointees tasked with dismantling the Justice Department, intelligence agencies, and the Defense Department, targeting the so-called deep state and individuals involved in prosecuting Trump.
Another faction seeks to stabilize the markets, which Trump envisions will be directed by Scott Bessent, the billionaire appointed as Treasury secretary. While Bessent can articulate MAGA principles around deregulation and tax cuts, he would likely strive to prevent Trump’s more extreme measures, such as tariff hikes on imported goods, from stifling the post-election stock market rally.
Then there’s a government contraction group led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, whose aspirations are extraordinarily ambitious. They aim to cut what Musk estimates will be “at least” $2 trillion from the federal budget, a figure that surpasses the total salaries of all federal employees. (For context, the entire federal budget for the 2024 fiscal year was $6.75 trillion.)
How these agendas will integrate and where they may conflict represents one of the significant uncertainties for the incoming administration.
Diversity of ideology is typically viewed as an asset in presidential Cabinets, not a drawback. However, if there’s any astonishment regarding Trump’s recent selections, it lies in the variety of experiences and outlooks that occasionally linger beneath a superficial commitment to the declared Make America Great Again loyalty — and loyalty to Trump himself. It is challenging to envision several of his appointees comfortably fitting in at a Trump rally.
“There’s more ideological variation here than I anticipated,” remarked presidential historian Michael Beschloss on Saturday. “In the context of history, this group could lead to discussions and debates. Should those debates unfold in a civil and open manner, history illustrates that such conflicts have, at times, resulted in effective policies.”
Even as the Republican Party embraces the MAGA philosophy, it may have been optimistic to believe that all members of a Trump administration would be uniformly aligned.
“We shouldn’t expect consistency of ideology or any other trait in Trump’s nominees,” said Chris Whipple, the author of “The Gatekeepers,” a book on White House chiefs of staff, on Saturday. “This is due to the absence of a systematic approach to these choices — it’s entirely at the discretion of the leader.”
Bessent underwent a late conversion to MAGA ideology. He appears to align with Trump’s enthusiasm for tariffs, although he has pointed out recently that implementing them gradually — a nuance Trump has not addressed — is vital for avoiding economic disruptions.
His identity as a gay, married father contrasts with the views held by some of Trump’s evangelical and far-right supporters. In an interview with Yale’s alumni magazine in 2015, he stated, “In specific regions and economic contexts, being gay is not an issue.” He further commented: “If you had told me in 1984, when we graduated, during the AIDS crisis, that three decades later I’d be legally married with two children through surrogacy, I would not have believed you.”
Yet, what may be even more unsettling for some of the MAGA followers is that Bessent solicited funds for the presidential campaign of Democrat Al Gore in 2000. Or that twelve years ago, he served as chief investment officer for Soros Fund Management, the $30 billion entity managed by George Soros, who is discussed extensively in right-wing conspiracy narratives. Trump omitted from his endorsement of Bessent the detail that he is regarded as one of Soros’ most successful protégés.
The recently appointed labor secretary pick, Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer, similarly appears to navigate two different spheres. Chavez-DeRemer, a Republican from Oregon who lost her House seat this month, frequently mentioned her father’s membership in the Teamsters and garnered endorsements from approximately 20 labor unions during her unsuccessful reelection attempt.
As the GOP rapidly consolidated in support of Trump, pledging to eliminate government regulations, Chavez-DeRemer took an opposing stance. She was one of three Republicans who sponsored a 2023 bill aimed at protecting workers seeking to unionize from retaliation or termination while granting new powers to the federal government to penalize employers who infringe upon workers’ rights.
The announcement on Friday of her taking the lead at the Labor Department was welcomed by the Teamsters and their president, Sean O’Brien. The AFL-CIO voiced concerns about Trump’s “anti-worker agenda” in a social media statement but acknowledged that “Lori Chavez-DeRemer has established a pro-labor history in Congress.”
One individual who seems to align perfectly with Trump’s ideology is Brooke Rollins, whom Trump designated on Saturday as his agriculture secretary choice. She previously worked as a domestic policy adviser in Trump’s first administration and later became president of the America First Policy Institute, akin to a Trump administration in waiting, staffed by other former officials from his administration.
Rollins’ organization has advocated for eliminating civil-service protections for various federal employees, expediting gas and oil drilling on federal lands, and abolishing red-flag laws meant to prevent firearms access for individuals deemed a danger to themselves or others by a judge.
Then there’s the national security team. Michael Waltz, the chosen national security adviser, previously championed increasing aid to Ukraine and taking necessary measures to counter the Russian invasion, but later voted against a $95 billion additional aid package for Ukraine in the spring.
His new deputy, Alex Wong, was involved with Mitt Romney in 2012, representing a faction of the Republican Party that has yet to come to terms with Trump. Nonetheless, Wong played a senior role in the State Department regarding North Korea, aiding in orchestrating Trump’s two summits with Kim Jong Un, the North Korean leader.
This leaves Musk, the richest man globally and a new resident of Mar-a-Lago, and Ramaswamy. They are intended to lead the “Department of Government Efficiency,” stating in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that “the entrenched and ever-expanding bureaucracy poses an existential threat to our republic.”
The department, or “DOGE,” as Musk refers to it playfully in homage to the cryptocurrency dogecoin, is not formally a department but rather a team of volunteers. Nonetheless, the pair insists that their forthcoming department will have a direct connection to the White House Office of Management and Budget aimed at reducing regulations, lowering headcounts, and slashing budgets.
They pledged to initially focus on “$500 billion plus in annual federal spending that is unauthorized by Congress or used in ways Congress never intended,” including funds allocated to international organizations or the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
(For context, the $535 million allocated to the public broadcasting entity, which Trump supporters claim funds liberally biased programming, would be a mere 0.026% toward Musk’s promised $2 trillion in reductions. Eliminating the entire U.S. defense budget wouldn’t even bring him halfway to his goal.)
It remains uncertain how they will interact with the Office of Management and Budget’s proposed head, Russell Vought, who played a pivotal role in Project 2025, outlining plans to overhaul the U.S. government to increase presidential authority by dismantling and reconstructing executive branch institutions.
