MAGA, a potent force within American politics, grapples with an intrinsic challenge: its own definition, constantly reshaped by the very figurehead it champions, Donald Trump. The movement’s purists seek a clear ideological framework, yet Trump’s approach often prioritizes personal instinct over rigid philosophical adherence, creating a fascinating internal dynamic.

While often perceived as monolithic, the “Make America Great Again” coalition is, in fact, remarkably diverse, encompassing various factions that don’t always align perfectly with the broader MAGA identity. Despite this internal variety, the bloc maintains a distinct worldview, setting it apart as the dominant force within the contemporary Republican Party.

A growing frustration is palpable among the MAGA faithful as they confront the reality that Trump does not consistently share or prioritize their specific ideological tenets. Their initial belief that allowing “Trump to be Trump” would naturally lead to the manifestation of their vision of MAGA has been challenged by the former president’s unpredictable trajectory.

This internal tension echoes historical conservative movements, reminiscent of the “Let Reagan be Reagan” rallying cry during Ronald Reagan’s presidency, when movement conservatives sought to steer him away from perceived centrism. However, applying past strategies to the Trump era has yielded different outcomes, highlighting the unique nature of Trumpism.

Initiatives like American Moment and Project 2025, designed to groom and credential a new cadre of appointees, illustrate the organized effort to solidify a specific “America First” agenda. Yet, the expectation that “personnel is policy” – a mantra from the Reagan era – has proven less effective under Trump, as the placement of loyalists doesn’t always translate into predictable policy outcomes.

Recent controversies, such as the Jeffrey Epstein matter, further exacerbate divisions within the movement. This issue highlights the schism between those who define Trumpism purely as loyalty to Donald Trump himself and those who believe such loyalty demands a more fundamental “cleansing” of perceived corrupt elites, or a more defined ideological stance.

Unlike Reaganism, which was rooted in a discernible philosophical framework, Trumpism defies easy classification as an ideology. Its defining characteristics are better understood through a psychological lens, influenced profoundly by Trump’s ego, and drawing heavily from the dramaturgy of professional wrestling, reality television, and Norman Vincent Peale’s prosperity gospel.

Trump’s oft-stated virtue of unpredictability means he is almost guaranteed to disappoint those who seek philosophical coherence or consistent policy. While his disruptive “bull in a China shop” approach initially excited many who assumed a deeper method to his madness, supporters are now realizing that Trump is beholden neither to established norms nor to the specific ideological expectations of his most ardent fans.

This inherent unpredictability leads to a significant conclusion: a political movement primarily defined by unwavering loyalty to a mercurial personality is inherently prone to fragmentation, particularly once that personality recedes from the central stage, or even sooner as internal contradictions become too pronounced.