New York Times Columnist Bret Stephens Embraces MAGA Ideology, Bids Farewell to “Never Trump” Movement
New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, known for his staunch opposition to President Donald Trump, has made a surprising pivot in his latest column titled “Done With Never Trump.” Stephens, who has identified as a “Never Trump conservative” for over nine years, is now expressing a willingness to move past his previous stance and embrace the ideology of Make America Great Again (MAGA).
In his column, Stephens reflects on the evolution of the “Never Trump” movement and acknowledges the shortcomings of himself and his colleagues in understanding the appeal of Trump to his supporters. He admits that while he and other critics of Trump focused on perceived moral failings and concerns about illiberalism, they failed to grasp the deeper reasons behind Trump’s popularity.
Reassessment of Trump’s Presidency
Stephens goes on to list several concessions, including his erroneous prediction of Trump leading the country into World War III and his misjudgment of Trump’s handling of Russia. He also acknowledges that the economy thrived under Trump, despite concerns about protectionism and overspending.
Understanding the MAGA Movement
One of the key revelations Stephens has had is the realization that while critics like himself prioritized issues like democracy, average voters were more concerned about inflation and immigration. He questions why Trump, often dismissed as a “fortunate fool,” was able to connect with voters on these key issues while the elites failed to do so.
A Call for Open-Mindedness
Despite his past criticisms of Trump, Stephens now urges fellow Never Trumpers to approach the new administration with an open mind. He calls for giving Trump’s cabinet picks a chance, avoiding hyperbolic comparisons to past dictators, and focusing on addressing real wrongs rather than hypothetical fears.
In a surprising turn of events, Stephens’ willingness to reevaluate his stance on Trump and the MAGA movement serves as a reminder that political beliefs are not set in stone and that evolving perspectives are a natural part of the democratic process.
As we navigate the complexities of the political landscape, perhaps there is a lesson to be learned from Stephens’ journey of introspection and openness to change. In a world where divisiveness often reigns, his willingness to reconsider his views offers a glimmer of hope for a more nuanced and empathetic approach to political discourse.
Let us take a moment to reflect on our own deeply held beliefs and consider the possibility that growth and understanding can come from engaging with differing perspectives. After all, in the ever-changing tapestry of politics, it is our capacity for introspection and evolution that truly defines our democratic spirit.