Project 2029
Imperial Governance for the Imperial Presidency
I want to preface everything I say here with two disclaimers: 1) I have no special inside knowledge of the inner workings of the administration beyond what any politically attentive and reasonably well-connected poster would know, and 2) 2029 is far too long away to make concrete predictions.
That being said, the second the midterms are over, these plans will start getting made, and many of the tensions I am going to talk about are already emerging, so I think it is worthwhile to get ahead of the curve.
We know a few facts about the 2028 election already. The first of these is that (unless Trump decides to run for a third term at the age of 82, which I would support but seems unlikely) J.D. Vance will be the Republican nominee. Every poll shows him with 80%+ Republican support, and all the major players have all but endorsed him. Those were the clear stakes of Trump’s 2024 VP pick, and Vance has played his part perfectly.
The second is that the Democrats have no serious candidate. The polling frontrunner, Kamala Harris, already lost once, got embarrassed by Vance repeatedly in the last campaign, has no natural charisma, and has already alienated most of the major power players in the Democrat party. The media frontrunner, Gavin Newsom, had to face a recall election in California of all places, draws constant comparisons to Patrick Bateman, and already faces strong opposition from the black woman wing of the party for the heinous crime of being a straight, white man. The most competent Democrat governor, Josh Shapiro, despite his talent and middle American appeal, will never win among minorities and young Democrats by virtue of being a literal IDF veteran as well as a straight white man.1 AOC is just a dumber, more annoying Bernie Sanders and will face the same treatment, Zohran Mamdani can’t legally run, and absolutely no one actually likes Pete Buttigieg.
This means that the Democrats will face a crowded field and an ugly primary, whoever emerges victorious will likely do so with only plurality support, and they will almost certainly alienate some major part of their coalition. In 2024, Biden and Harris refused to condemn Israel (which would have alienated their overwhelmingly Jewish and more moderate donor base), and in the process they lost the vote of Blacks and Muslims, especially in Michigan. That sort of conundrum will likely play out across the board, especially without such a recognizable figure as Trump to rally against.
As a result, assuming the economy holds steady or improves and nothing on the order of Covid-19 occurs, Vance should have a huge advantage going into 2028. He’s well spoken, inoffensive to suburban white moms (whatever Buzzfeed may try to claim), and will easily carry the mantle of being Trump’s successor (even if he lacks Trump’s revolutionary force of personality). Victory is not a given, and a lot could change between now and then, but Vance gaining the presidency is at a bare minimum a serious possibility, and probably more likely than any other particular outcome.
The real problem for the Vance administration will come after the election as they prepare to actually wield power. The problem is this: MAGA, and the Right broadly, is a loose coalition of disparate groups currently held together only by the person of Donald J. Trump and nothing else. There is no “Trumpism,” there is no “Conservative Movement,” there is just Trump. These groups will likely rally around Vance in 2028 to ensure or enlarge their own power, but the second a winner is announced they will all begin pursuing their own interests and agendas.
The only solution to this problem is to embrace the Roman imperial model of government: destroy your enemies while making use of your allies, but without letting them gain enough power to challenge you. This is a fine art, which requires balance and tact. My goal for this essay is to produce a rough sketch of how I see these different factions breaking down, how the Vance administration should respond to them, and, finally, lay out some suggestions for what a Vance administration cabinet might look like if he were to follow these principles.
The Anatomy of the Right
The Right (in this case basically synonymous with the Republican Party) can be divided loosely into MAGA, non-MAGA, and independents or fence-riders. This has been the essential division for the last decade. However, each of those groups can be broken down further into different ideological, interest, and proximity groups. Even within those groups, of course, different personalities have different goals, but the groupings remain useful as descriptors. For my purposes, I identify X different such groups (Y MAGA, Z non-MAGA, and 1 for independents). You could quibble with these, and any given writer might come up with any given number, but I think they work as generalizations. I will deal with each in order and outline the roles I think they will play in the next election and administration.
MAGA Populists
Description: A collection of influencers, media figures, and media-focused politicians who have made up the bulk of Trump’s loudest and strongest supporters. MAGA Populists love the American flag, Kid Rock, shallow references to religion, adding journalists to secret group chats, and sex scandals, and seem eternally in a diva competition for attention and Trump’s approval. They have been extremely loyal and done good work, but they are sloppy, bring a lot of baggage with them, and invert an old feminist slogan as their own: the political is the personal.
Notable Members: Steve Bannon, Kristi Noem, Corey Lewandowski, Pete Hegseth, Matt Gaetz, Lauren Boebert.
Correct Response: quietly send them out to the farm. This can be done by backing them to run independently in safe gubernatorial or congressional races, convincing them to focus full-time on their podcasting career, or simply thanking them for their service and then letting them fade back into obscurity. These people have proven themselves to be a liability, and although Trump’s brash personality can easily survive that sort of baggage, Vance won’t have the same luxury. None of the people mentioned above should hold any position in the administration or be given any influence over policy decisions.
Thielbros/Vance Loyalists
Description: Vance’s personal network. Most of these people are veterans of Peter Thiel-backed ventures, have run for office with Thielbucks, or are Vance’s friends from Yale Law. They are highly educated, high achieving elites who helped put Vance in power, but now have to look to him as their sole political patron.
Notable Members: Peter Thiel, Blake Masters, Joe Kent, Dan Driscoll, Vivek Ramaswamy, Palmer Lucky, Joe Lonsdale, anyone associated with Palantir or Thiel Capital.
Correct Response: make use of their talents and loyalty, but don’t let them become liabilities. Masters was Thiel’s other political gamble, running for Senate at the same time as Vance, and although he wasn’t successful, he remains remarkably talents. Kent and Driscoll are already in high level positions in the current admin and are due for a promotion to cabinet-level positions. Vivek poses the biggest problem, as he is terrible on immigration and completely alienated the base on that point, but Vance already seems to have sidelined him by backing him for governor of Ohio. Win or lose, that is likely the end of his political career, and the damage should be limited, if unfortunate. The rest are likely to stay private sector but should be a reliable source of campaign funds and recruitment channels for junior talent.
The Tech Right
Description: adjacent to the Thielbros and members of Vance’s broader social circle, but without as close of ties. These figures are wealthy, powerful, and have already played various roles in the Trump administration but also have the potential to be very dangerous. They tend to be weak on immigration, especially the H1B program, and are prone to narcissistic crash-outs, but provide incredible levels of funding and talent.
Notable Members: Elon Musk, David Sacks, Marc Andreessen.
Correct Response: appease them while keeping them at arm’s length. None of these people should be allowed anywhere near immigration policy or given the indication that they will get what they want, but their support can be ensured by letting them more or less run the show on AI, crypto, space exploration, and other futuristic topics, as well as with lucrative government contracts. They should never be allowed to be seen as speaking for the administration though, as that opens up too many liabilities. In addition, if that distance is maintained, then if something blows up in the tech sphere, Musk or whoever can be given up as a sacrificial lamb to insulate the administration from blame.
MAGA Hawks
Description: neocons who understand how politics works. These figures are basically indistinguishable from Never Trump/Neocon types in their policy preferences but recognized that they benefit more from collaboration than from resistance. Their primary issues are protecting Israel and bombing Iran, but they also tend to be pro-intervention in almost every other case, including Ukraine and Latin America.
Notable Members: Lindsey Graham, Tom Cotton, John Thune, Ben Shapiro.
Correct Response: maintain the Trump administration line. These people are cynical and concerned above all with their own power, so just make clear to them that you will play ball as long as they do. As long as they remain loyal votes in Congress, endorse them, don’t run against them, and occasionally throw them a bone where it makes sense, such as defending U.S. hegemony in Latin America and preventing Iran from building nukes. On the flip side, do not give them any actual administration positions related to foreign policy, and go after them hard if they show a hint of disloyalty.
Traditional Conservatives
Description: the old organs of the Republican Party. They support small government, less spending, less regulation, and general social conservatism. Traditional Conservatives represent less and less of the electorate and the donor base as Baby Boomers start to die off, but they still control most of the major think tanks and other institutions inside the Beltway, especially on the legislative side. Many of these groups started anti-Trump, but have generally gotten in line over time.
Notable Members: Mike Johnson, Heritage Foundation, House Freedom Caucus.
Correct Response: let them fade away. Keep letting them host their conferences, go to them even, use their information as needed, and encourage them to keep staffing their key positions with your loyalists. The only real concern here is that they try to repeat the Project 2025 debacle, where they ruin a good idea by writing an 800-page policy manifesto filled with unpopular nonsense without consulting the campaign they were ostensibly trying to help. Academics need to be corralled and guided. Just don’t expect too much of them.
The Religious Right
Description: hardline evangelicals and Catholics whose primary concerns are abortion, religious freedom, and finger-wagging. They overlap heavily with Traditional Conservatives on their intellectual wing, and with MAGA Populists on their popular wing, so much of the same descriptors apply. They bring a lot of their own baggage and unpopular issues, but they are also very effective at youth organizing and are very high propensity voters.
Notable Members: Josh Hawley, Matt Walsh, Erika Kirk, Karoline Leavitt, the Pro-Life Movement, Turning Point USA.
Correct Response: let them do their thing, but make sure they know they are part of a coalition, not calling the shots. Vance really should have no trouble with this: he is himself an educated Catholic convert with ties throughout the Religious Right but has also been very effective on messaging when explaining why the Trump Administration does not support a nation-wide abortion ban.
Immigration Hawks
Description: cops and experts whose only focus is keeping the border closed and deporting those already here. They are essential for pursuing the most important policy goal of both the current Trump administration and the future Vance administration, but they tend to not be effective politicians, and they don’t always play nice with others. Homan and Bovino are both at the age of retirement anyway, so will likely be phased out and replaced by others even before 2028, and Krikorian is an effective think tank guy who will just keep doing the same thing as before, so the only real question here is Miller.2
Notable Members: Stephen Miller, Tom Homan, Greg Bovino, Mark Krikorian.
Correct Response: This is the biggest wild card for me. I genuinely don’t know what Miller and Vance’s relationship looks like or where Miller’s broader ambitions are directed, but both have been extremely effective communicators for the administration. There seem to be two possible paths. If Vance has a good working relationship with Miller and can trust him, then the maximalist option is to promote him to Chief of Staff. That would make the Right’s most effective and hardline operative into Vance’s right-hand man and the guiding visionary behind the White House. If not, he’d be best placed as Homeland Security secretary, where he can single-mindedly pursue his main issue, but also take the blame if he goes off script (assuming Senate Republicans don’t block his nomination).
Anti-MAGA Populists
Description: former MAGA stars or cynical grifters who decided that attacking Trump would get them more clicks than being loyalists. Every negative thing I said about MAGA Populists applies to these people, but none of the positive things. Read Mystery Grove’s excellent (but extremely long) takedown of them here, or else just take a look at the X feed of patriots like Captive Dreamer or Patrick Casey. I endorse everything they say on the topic.
Notable Members: Thomas Massie, Rand Paul, Marjorie Taylor-Greene, Tucker Carlson, Candance Owens, Nick Fuentes, Dave Smith, Podcast Bros.
Correct Response: destroy by any means necessary. Strong arm friendly institutions and media organizations into blacklisting them. Mock them openly if they get attention and ignore them otherwise. Hope Candace Owens is right and let the French Foreign Legion and the Mossad have open season. Look the other way if Zionist psychopaths like Joel Berry give them explosive pagers. Launch them into the sun. Slowly lower them into a pit of sharks while cackling and stroking a cat. I genuinely don’t care how you do it, but this entire sphere needs to be discredited. The best actual policy position is probably to get the Supreme Court to overturn New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) so that these people can be sued into oblivion for provably lying and slandering the administration. There is nothing to be gained from these people, and any attempt to try to win them back is wasted effort.
Never-Trump/Neocons
Description: the last holdouts of the pre-Trump Republican party. Never Trumpers have never forgiven Trump for proving them wrong about everything, and they have already picked Vance as their primary target for criticism. I have only met one voter in my life who actually listened to them though, so I’m not sure we should be scared. If Vance wins in 2028, they should finally fade fully out of history, but they’ll be cheering for a loss so that they can finally blame Trump and try to retake the party.
Notable Members: Charles Koch, Jonah Goldberg, The Bulwark, The Lincoln Project, National Review, AEI, every Ron Desantis 2024 donor, and other zombified corpses of George Bush aides.
Correct Response: mostly nothing, Trump already destroyed them utterly. The only thing of value to do would be quietly open the door to allow them to defect and join the ranks of the MAGA Hawks once Trump is no longer a personal obstacle, but very few of them will take that offer and the total value added would be fairly minor. Otherwise, just let them fully become Democrats and then use them as a liability to point out that Democrats hang out with war criminals.
Independents
Description: former Trump rivals who have bent the knee but retain their own popularity and therefore pose potential dangers. Any of these could try to run in a primary against Vance (some more likely than others), which is an outcome that should be avoided at all costs. One of those costs, though, will likely be cabinet positions.
Notable Members: Marco Rubio, Ron Desantis, Ted Cruz, Glenn Youngkin, Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr.
Correct Response: As a whole, the carrot and stick should be the promise of a desirable position if they swear allegiance, and total scorched earth destruction if they try to run against you. Beyond that, each needs to be dealt with individually:
Rubio: has most clearly gotten on board the agenda and has already signaled his support for Vance and lack of interest in challenging him. I’m sure a deal has already been cut. The vice-presidency is his, and well deserved. He is charismatic, effective as Secretary of State, and has been totally loyal this term. He is a great asset.
Desantis: he did some real damage to himself with his failed 2024 run against Trump, but he has remained an effective and popular governor and was considered a 2028 front runner had he not run. Hopefully this time around he will see the benefits of playing ball, as he has been one of the administration’s most loyal allies on immigration and education. He could be a good choice for either DHS or DOE on those grounds, but his law background and proven effectiveness in removing Soros-backed prosecutors in Florida could make him an excellent candidate for Attorney General.
Cruz: Cruz is clearly building up a presidential campaign for himself on the pro-Israel lane, but while he might get donors, he won’t even reach the levels of his failed 2016 run. If he does run, he should be crushed and discarded. If not, the best place for him would be as a judge or even as a Supreme Court Justice but barring that he could be an uninspiring but tolerable choice for AG.
Youngkin: Youngkin managed to win handily in deep blue Virginia, has an incredible appeal to suburban white moms, and has expressed interest in running in 2028. He should be promised fairly extensive sweepstakes to stay out of the race and be a campaign proxy. Department of Education would be an obvious choice due to his good work on transgenderism and Critical Race Theory in schools, and any economic position (Treasury, Interior, Commerce, Labor, HUD, etc.) would make sense due to his long business background.
Gabbard: after a failed Democratic presidential run in 2020, in which she attacked Hillary Clinton and uniparty foreign policy, Gabbard eventually left the Democrat party and drifted more into the Trump sphere, finally emerging as a staunch Trump proxy in 2024. She probably doesn’t have enough of a base to run for president again, not to mention donors, but she’s charismatic, has cross aisle appeal, and would be an important person to keep loyal. She could stay on as DNI, but the impetus would be to promote her, in which case National Security Advisor or Secretary of State could be good options.
Kennedy: another former Democrat and presidential candidate, this time in 2024, Kennedy aligned himself with Trump, ending his third-party run in exchange for a cabinet position. He is popular with the base as the leader of the MAHA movement, so losing him as an ally would be deeply unfortunate. At his age he may retire, but if not, there probably isn’t a better replacement at HHS.
Mock Cabinet
Here is a rough outline of what I think the most practical cabinet set-up would be in 2029. There are a lot of positions, and a lot of them really don’t matter much in the grand scheme of things, so I’ll ignore any where I don’t think there’s an obvious pick.
Vice President: Marco Rubio (Previous: Secretary of State).
Secretary of State: Tulsi Gabbard (Previous: Director of National Intelligence).
Secretary of Defense/War: Daniel Driscoll (Previous: Secretary of the Army).
Attorney General: Ron Desantis (Previous: Governor of Florida) or a former state AG.
Secretary of Health and Human Services: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (no change) or internal promotion.
Secretary of Education: Glenn Youngkin (Previous: Governor of Virginia).
Secretary of Homeland Security: Stephen Miller (Previous: Deputy Chief of Staff for Homeland Security) or Ron Desantis.
National Security Advisor: Elbridge Colby (Previous: Undersecretary of Defense for Policy and Planning).3
Director of National Intelligence: Joe Kent (Previous: Director of the National Counterterrorism Center).
Other Positions: a 1:1:1 ratio of Vance loyalists, current admin officials, and important senators and governors.
A bunch of you dorks will be in the comments saying “Jews aren’t white.” I don’t care. Black people and Palestinians frame them as white, so for these purposes they are.
These same principles apply to certain other policy specialists. In particular, Elbridge Colby comes to mind as the preeminent China strategist. He is currently in DoD but would make an excellent NSA.
See footnote 2.
Really well done article. Impressive and I pretty much agree. 👍