Donald Trump’s appointments are turning out to be much more ideologically varied than many believed. Of course, the president in pectore is appointing various conservative figures for key roles: Marco Rubio at the State Department, John Ratcliffe at the head of the CIA and Pam Bondi at the head of the Justice Department. However, it is interesting to note how, on the other hand, he is also designating figures who, in a certain sense, look to the left.
Appointed Secretary of Health, Robert Kennedy jr was historically a Democrat and, as an independent presidential candidate, had also attracted voters traditionally linked to the Donkey. A partly similar argument applies to Tulsi Gabbard, who Trump has chosen as the next director of national intelligence: she was a Democratic MP for a long time and, between 2013 and 2016, she was also vice president of the National Committee of the Democratic Party. The tycoon also selected Steve Bessent as Treasury secretary: a former associate of George Soros, who, in the past, financed Al Gore, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. All this, without forgetting the nomination of Lori Chavez-DeRemer as Secretary of Labor: a Republican congresswoman who had the support of the truckers’ union and who, in the Chamber, was among the few members of her party to have voted in favor of a bill aimed at guaranteeing greater union protections for workers (the PRO Act).
In short, it is clear that the nascent American administration is starting to reveal itself as ideologically composite. And this for a number of reasons. First of all, already during the electoral campaign, Trump used to formulate a political message that was capable of transcending the boundaries of conservatism alone: on the other hand, a significant part of his strategy was to address not only independent voters but also, if not perhaps above all, to the disappointed Democrats. An electoral share, this, which proved decisive especially in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. It follows that, with these ideologically varied appointments, the president in pectore aims to reflect the complex and articulated nature of the electoral coalition that brought him back to the White House.
Secondly, it is clear that Trump aims to displace his critics to defuse those who accuse him of being a right-wing extremist. Last but not least, his objective is to highlight positively the fact that he has chosen former adversaries for key roles who, over time, have converted to Trumpism. On the other hand, the theme of “political conversion” is very dear to Trump’s political-communicative strategy. And it was one of the reasons behind his choice of JD Vance as running mate: that JD Vance who, in 2016, had shown himself to be very critical of the tycoon.
Of course, Trump is taking a political risk. These “heterodox” appointments will in fact have to be ratified by the Senate. And here the Republicans, who have the majority, could turn up their noses. The president in pectore, however, can enjoy a relatively wide margin of maneuver, claiming his electoral success and, above all, tying it to his ability to have revealed himself to be politically transversal. This is precisely where Trump’s strength lies. And it is from here that he is starting again, to shuffle the cards and disavow some of the fictional narratives that they have tried to sew on him.
