Interesting article Can a Bannon-Groyper Alliance Derail Vance?
It’s hard to pinpoint what Mr. Fuentes believes. He has vacillated between being Trump’s biggest fan to perennial critic. But when viewed through the lens of ‘sowing division for personal gain,’ Fuentes’ apparent capriciousness makes sense. This explains why he is constantly defecting or disavowing individuals he once supported when they become too influential. He seeks infighting and social unrest provided it means more attention for him, than the advancement of any particular political agenda.
Anyone who follows political discourse on Twitter can see a clear divide between the MAGA “true believers” (e.g., Scott Adams and Catturd) and the “MAGA skeptics,” who reliably criticize Trump and his staff at any opportunity, in which Fuentes and his followers falls into the latter. There is a sort of power struggle between these two groups. Loss of public support for Trump due to scandal or by sowing division, means more power and influence for the second group.
Thus, the worst thing that can happen is for the ‘MAGA movement’ to actually secure power, as it would make Mr. Feuntes’ brand as a gadfly less relevant. He would rather have a more emboldened left and more relevance in terms of his streaming show, than a weakened left and less relevance. Or better yet, unrest and crisis, without any side winning, provided he can insert himself into the center of the conversation, which is what matters in the end for him.
During crisis–as seen in 2020 during Covid, the BLM riots, or Jan 6th–means more donations and traffic to his show and Telegram channel, but it also means he can position himself as the ‘savior’ or spokesperson of the movement to his followers. This is not possible if there is stability and Trump captures the glory that Fuentes believes he is entitled to. What better way to get credit for saving the movement than to endorse people antithetical it, and by putting out the fire he helped to start and hoping no one notices he is also holding the matches?
Fuentes’ brand was still big and relevant from 2020-2023 despite Trump’s popularity, as he was able to play off of Ron DeSantis’ momentum as a 2024 challenger and Trump’s potentially career-ending legal problems. This meant there was still a power void. But by mid-2024–after Trump had overcome his legal challenges, DeSantis was no longer a contender, Covid effectively over, and perceiving having lost relevance now that everyone in the movement was unified behind Trump–saw Mr. Fuentes defect to endorse Kamala. Elon Musk, having acquired Twitter, also stole the spotlight by endorsing Trump.
He also felt slighted by the belief that he was being ignored. I can understand why he felt betrayed, but it also reeks of entitlement that if he cannot dictate the direction of the movement, then the only recourse is to tear it down. He has used Israel, Epstein, and Iran to try to drive a wedge between Trump’s base, but even if Trump was perfect in this regard, he would still find something else to nitpick about, as more infighting means more attention directed towards Mr. Fuentes. Similarly he recently attacked Tucker after initially supporting him, in another attempt to sow division or spread doubt.
Endorsing Kamala makes sense if the objective is to foment unrest–such as more racially-motivated crime and wokeness, like in 2020. Similarly, endorsing Newsom for 2028 also makes sense under the same desire to stir unrest and undo the progress Trump has made, so again he can position himself as having the answers to the problem he also helped to create.