But after the midterm disaster, why should anyone expect Trumpism to suddenly become popular?
At various points during each of Donald Trump’s two presidencies, the political class has looked up in astonishment and exclaimed, “Goodness me! It looks like Donald Trump is going to govern like Donald Trump!”
I don’t know why anyone should have been surprised. Whatever else you or I may think of him, it was always clear that Donald Trump was going to do things his own way. With the appointment of Stephen Miller as White House chief of staff, we have arrived at another one of those moments.
Ever since the heady days of the 2016 campaign, which he joined first as a policy adviser and speechwriter, Miller has proved to be one of Trump’s most combative surrogates. Notably, in the second Trump administration, his role has grown in influence and power.
“In addition to helping oversee the militarized crackdown of the U.S.-Mexico border,” the New York Times’s Zolan Kanno-Youngs and Hamed Aleaziz report, Miller “set in motion the suspension of U.S. refugee programs and the deadly deportation crackdowns on American streets.”
But his influence during Mr. Trump’s second term has extended beyond immigration policy. He also pushed Mr. Trump’s lethal strikes on civilian boats in the Caribbean that the administration claimed were carrying drugs. He helped use the powers of the federal government to target political opponents and universities, and oversaw the federal crackdown in the District of Columbia.
My own view is that Miller’s extreme performative combativeness — even when defending what should be defensible policy positions — is not always helpful to the administration he serves. He usually comes off indignant, heated, and like he’s trying to win a debating point in whatever the argument is of that moment; there seems to be little thought to strategically advancing the ball down the field more generally. After the Trump administration’s remarkable and manifest success in securing the U.S.-Mexico border in the early months of 2025, Miller had a notable hand in pushing not only the policy but the messaging around what became the draconian and unpopular ICE crackdowns in major U.S. cities that culminated with the unrest in Minneapolis last winter.
When Miller publicly branded two U.S. citizens killed during federal immigration enforcement actions in Minneapolis “domestic terrorists” and “would-be assassins,” can anyone argue with a straight face that Miller was helping the administration’s political position? On the contrary, there’s simply no doubt that Miller’s overheated rhetoric around his preferred policy contributed to the steep decline in the popularity of strict immigration enforcement. (We know that Trump saw the declining political utility of ICE’s heavy presence in Minnesota because the president, who has made a career out of a reputation for never backing down, backed down.)
A year on, however, Miller now finds himself empowered and elevated to chief of staff in the White House, a position of immense power and influence. For anyone wondering whether the Trump administration would learn any lessons from its midterm shellacking and pivot to pursuing policies more in line with the public’s preferences, it’s unlikely that Miller is going to be the one driving a course correction.
Expect Stephen Miller to double down on Trumpism. That may or may not bring the Trump administration wins on policy. It may or may not be an effective strategy to delay, distract, and defuse Democratic congressional investigations into the administration’s actions and potential corruption.
But just don’t expect the Trump administration’s actions under Miller’s influence to suddenly become politically popular. The track record, in fact, points to the opposite as the most likely outcome.
I can already hear the gasps and whispers: Goodness gracious! Donald Trump is going to govern like Donald Trump!