WASHINGTON – representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is publicly challenging whether Donald Trump still embodies the “America First” principles that defined his presidency, escalating a rift within the Republican party over foreign policy and economic priorities. The Georgia congresswoman’s criticism comes as Trump appears to soften his stance on international intervention and downplays concerns about economic anxieties among voters.
Greene, a staunch advocate of a non-interventionist foreign policy, stated bluntly, “America First, America Only. Hardcore.” She confirmed she has not spoken with Trump to resolve their differences, adding, “100% haven’t changed.”
The dispute unfolds against a backdrop of a challenging housing market and rising cost of living. A recent report by the National Association of Realtors found that only approximately 20% of homes sold in the year ending in June were purchased by first-time buyers. Greene cited her own adult children – ages 22, 26, and 28 – as representative of a generation facing limited economic opportunities. “They don’t think they’re ever really going to be able to buy a home,” she said.”They were promised, you go to college, you’re going to get a great job. That doesn’t exist. That’s not reality.”
During a recent Fox News interview, trump discussed affordability but appeared to minimize americans’ economic concerns, labeling the issue a “con job by the Democrats” and dismissing polling data indicating it was a primary concern for voters as “fake.”
Greene’s message has gained traction within the GOP, notably following recent disappointing election results. She has also received praise from across the political spectrum for her willingness to publicly criticize members of her own party, including during a recent appearance on “The view.”
Greene dismissed speculation about a potential 2028 presidential run, stating her focus remains on representing her district. Analysts suggest the tension reflects a broader shift within the Trump movement. Justin Logan, a foreign policy analyst at the Cato Institute, noted that as long as Americans do not perceive direct costs from foreign engagements, dissent within the movement may be contained. “If they can win on the argument that they’ve been prosperous and cheap, they’ll be able to push back their critics,” he said of the management.
