Ten months into Donald Trump’s second term, the Make America Great Again movement — once a monolith of unyielding loyalty that propelled the president back to the White House — finds itself in the throes of a profound and public schism.

What began with a simmering debate over the meaning of “America First” has erupted into open warfare, driven by Mr. Trump’s aggressive maneuvers on Ukraine, Israel, Venezuela, and China. Conservative media and platforms like X and Rumble have amplified the split, exposing a movement once unified by loyalty to Mr. Trump but now divided between isolationist purists and interventionist hawks. 

One faction sees targeted foreign engagements as vital to American leverage; the other views them as a betrayal of working-class voters who demand domestic revival. The clash is reshaping power dynamics, succession plans, and MAGA’s tolerance for dissent, testing how well the movement can function as a governing force. 

The debate is about “rivalries for influence on the process of policy,” a global risk and finance analyst, Dennis Santiago, tells The New York Sun. “Open debate is the very core of the United States’ ability to maintain a moral compass. Our government is designed around this principle. No matter who’s in charge, it’s a heavy lift for any administration to interpret and explain the flood of competing viewpoints Americans encounter.”

A Clash Over Israel and the Meaning of ‘America First‘

No issue, perhaps, has ignited the MAGA civil war so much as Washington’s support for Israel amid its conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon. Mr. Trump’s unwavering backing — including $3.8 billion in annual aid and veto threats against United Nations resolutions — has drawn fire from a vocal anti-interventionist wing, who argue it diverts resources from America’s borders and factories. 

Tucker Carlson, whose Tucker Carlson Network podcast reaches millions of MAGA listeners, has emerged as the loudest provocateur in the rift. In a bombshell October 31, 2025, episode, Mr. Carlson hosted white nationalist Nick Fuentes for a two-hour discussion that veered into overt antisemitism while casting U.S. aid to Israel as a “foreign lobby’s stranglehold” on American politics. 

The interview, which garnered 20 million views in its first week, prompted the Heritage Foundation’s antisemitism task force to sever ties with Mr. Carlson’s allies, exposing fault lines between pro-Israel evangelicals and a rising “groyper” faction comprising loosely organized, far-right online activists sympathetic to paleoconservative isolationism.

This backlash has become intertwined with personal vendettas, most explosively in the feud between Mr. Trump and the outspoken Georgia representative, Marjorie Taylor Greene. Once a firebrand defender of the president, Ms. Greene announced her resignation from Congress on November 22, effective January 5, 2026, capping a month-long public meltdown triggered by her advocacy for releasing the Jeffrey Epstein files. 

Ms. Greene co-sponsored a bipartisan discharge petition that forced a House vote on November 18, bypassing GOP leadership to mandate the Department of Justice’s full disclosure of largely unredacted Epstein documents within 30 days. 

Mr. Trump, who supported the petition only after its passage became inevitable, initially branded the effort a “Dem hoax” and withdrew his endorsement of Ms. Greene, calling her a “traitor” on Truth Social. 

In retaliation, Ms. Greene pivoted to an “America First, America Only” mantra, accusing Mr. Trump’s closest advisers of prioritizing “Zionist lobbies” over domestic priorities like fentanyl deaths and inflation.

The Epstein bill, which cleared the Senate unanimously the same day as the House vote and quickly garnered Mr. Trump’s signature, supercharged broader debates on Israel. 

Ms. Greene’s exit — hailed by the president as “great news for the country” — reflects the risks in challenging Mr. Trump, but also emboldened critics like Candace Owens and Stephen K. Bannon, who echo Mr. Carlson’s warnings that unchecked support for Israel risks alienating young, diverse conservatives wary of “endless wars.” 

On X, #MAGAIsraelDivide trended for 24 hours after the Carlson-Fuentes interview, with posts from grassroots accounts decrying “neocon infiltration” and the invocation of purity tests that now include antisemitic undertones, as noted in a Le Monde analysis of the movement’s drift toward the neo-Nazi fringes.

Foreign Policy Priorities and Their Political Consequences

The Israel rift is merely the most visible fault line; Mr. Trump’s globe-spanning agenda has fissured MAGA across multiple fronts. 

On Ukraine, Mr. Trump’s abrupt pivot, demanding that Kyiv “accept reality” and surrender land it still controls as part of a Russia-favorable cease-fire, has irked both hawks like Senator Lindsey Graham and isolationists who see it as capitulation to Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin. 

The president’s approach to Venezuela exemplifies the surge of interventionism. Mr. Trump has authorized at least 21 military strikes since September, killing 43 suspected drug traffickers, in what is framed as a border security campaign against the “Cártel de los Soles” and its reputed leader, President Nicolás Maduro.

The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has steered this hawkish line, reframing regime change around oil access and anti-cartel operations — surprising purists who recall Mr. Trump’s first-term hesitance. Mr. Bannon lambasted the approach as “neocon bait,” warning it alienates “forgotten Americans” who are more interested in Rust Belt jobs than Latin American adventures. 

Even the policy on China, a MAGA bête noire, stirs unease. Mr. Trump’s escalated tariffs and tech bans have unified the base. But his reported plans to meet twice next year with Xi Jinping, aimed in part at rare-earth mineral deals have Mr. Bannon’s allies fuming over “globalist sellouts.” 

On Iran, the summer saw Mr. Rubio’s more hawkish star rise as Mr. Bannon’s non-interventionist stance waned, with Mr. Trump opting for strikes on nuclear facilities. However, it is not yet clear which tack the president will take going forward as he endeavors to preserve his “peacemaker” image post-Abraham Accords expansion. 

A Movement Redefining Itself Around Power, Influence, and Succession

Grassroots outrage also flared after the assassination on September 11 of the Turning Point USA founder, Charlie Kirk, at a Utah rally. Just hours earlier, Kirk had decried foreign “distractions” amid chants of “America First.” 

Kirk’s death sparked the firing of more than 600 of his online critics, further polarizing the base between vengeance-driven loyalists and those bemoaning an erosion of free speech.

Meanwhile, frustration simmers over the outsize sway held by Silicon Valley and Wall Street titans who promote AI deregulation and H-1B visa expansions that clash with MAGA’s anti-immigration core. 

A former Breitbart editor, Raheem Kassam, urged Mr. Trump on X to shun “Big Tech overlords,” while a social media commentator, Mike Cernovich, lamented Washington’s “historic-level corruption” in a viral thread. The White House deputy press secretary, Kush Desai, countered: “The president’s sole focus is the American people,” dismissing charges of elite influence as “baseless smears.”

The Path Ahead

As 2025 draws to a close, Mr. Trump is suffering record-low approval ratings but still commands roughly 82 percent approval from his core MAGA supporters. Nevertheless, his foreign policy moves continue to ignite open rebellion among the base. 

On November 18, he welcomed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman with full pomp, signed $110 billion in arms and AI deals, and waved away the 2018 Khashoggi murder with a casual “things happen.” That prompted Mr. Bannon to denounce the spectacle as “desert neoconism.”

At the same time, the Trump administration is forging closer ties with the once-pariah Persian Gulf state of Qatar. Earlier this year, the president accepted a $400 million luxury Boeing 747-8 from Qatar as a “gift” to serve as the new Air Force One and extended the agreement for the huge American air base at Al Udeid. 

That set off a firestorm from Laura Loomer, Mr. Fuentes, and the hardline isolationist wing, who accused the president of selling out “America First” to a country they brand as a Hamas financier and “terror-funding state.” Ms. Loomer’s viral post — “We’re trading our principles for Qatari blood money” — racked up millions of views within hours.

Less than a year before the 2026 midterms and with major decisions looming on Ukraine, Venezuela, and China, these internal rifts are widening. The MAGA movement, shaken by assassinations, resignations, and ideological purges, is no longer just testing Mr. Trump’s coalition; it’s reshaping conservatism itself. 

“America First” now means different things to different factions, and whether they unify behind a new leader, after Mr. Trump leaves office, or break apart entirely will define the future of the American right in an increasingly unstable world.

Still, not everyone sees the disorder as a sign of collapse. 

“I do not believe that the core values guiding policy under the MAGA agenda are as disrupted as the media would portray them to be,” said Mr. Santiago, the global risk and finance analyst.

“The movement is pragmatic and remains focused on an America First mission. What I do see is that the purist model is being tested against long-standing American assumptions, practices, and prejudices. That’s always a messy thing, but it is a necessary thing to find the true course.”