A stunning critique is echoing through Republican circles, originating from a former Congressman who suggests Donald Trump’s endorsements have become a signal of who *not* to support. Bob Good, once a staunch conservative and House Freedom Caucus chair, delivered a blunt assessment: the former president himself is the core issue, not the advisors surrounding him.
Good’s statement, posted on social media, was stark: “Trump IS the problem.” He argued that simply reversing Trump’s endorsement choices would be a more effective strategy for selecting winning candidates than following them. This isn’t abstract commentary; Good experienced the consequences firsthand.
In a bruising 2024 primary battle in Virginia’s 5th Congressional District, Good was defeated by John McGuire, a candidate explicitly backed by Trump. The former president actively campaigned against Good, repeatedly denouncing him as “BAD FOR VIRGINIA, AND BAD FOR THE USA” on his social media platform.
The loss marked a dramatic turn for Good, who had previously aligned himself with Trump’s agenda. Now, he contends that Trump’s choices are driven by flattery rather than genuine conservative principles. He recently asserted that Trump’s endorsement history reveals a preference for establishment figures – what he termed “RINOs.”
Good’s accusations go further, claiming Trump has *never* based an endorsement on a candidate’s qualifications, character, or policy positions. It’s a damning indictment from within the former president’s own party, suggesting a fundamental disconnect between Trump’s public support and his actual selection process.
He isn’t alone in this assessment. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a once-fervent Trump ally who later experienced a falling out, has also voiced sharp criticism of his endorsement strategy. Greene’s argument is equally pointed: Trump’s endorsements don’t dismantle the political establishment; they reinforce it.
According to Greene, these endorsements actively “solidify the swamp and ensure the swamp is never drained.” This shared skepticism from two former Trump supporters raises serious questions about the value and intent behind the former president’s political backing, potentially reshaping how candidates approach his endorsements in future elections.
