Politics and the Pendulum – Part One, The Swingers

Why a Transition Is Likely for Some of the Power Brokers

• Their power isn’t personal — it’s structural

Most of the real influence lies with money, institutions, networks — not individuals. That means when political winds shift, these same actors can often pivot. For example:

• Money-management of campaigns, “dark money” flows, donor networks, and institutional influence tend to outlast any single candidate. OpenSecrets+2The Washington Post+2

• Organizations and infrastructure used to support one side can often be retooled.

• They chase influence, not ideology

For many of these behind-the-scenes players (donors, corporate funders, political consultants, media influencers), the goal is access and leverage — not loyalty to a party. If a left-leaning coalition offers equal or better opportunities for influence, some may jump.

• The “business model” of power prefers stability over polarization long-term

If polarization becomes too chaotic or destructive, even those on the right may see benefit in a reset. Power brokers value predictability for business, regulation, and profit — and a left-leaning administration that stabilizes markets or avoids social instability could be just as useful.

• Historical precedent: coalitions shift, not all witnesses the change

American political history shows that power centers can survive party shifts — sometimes just under new banners. Groups or donors who backed one party may hedge their bets when the balance changes.

But There Are Big Obstacles to a Smooth Transition

• Institutional memory & reputational baggage

If a donor or influencer spent years openly backing extreme ideologies or radical policies under Trump, a shift to support a left-leaning administration might cost them credibility — with their base, their existing networks, or with the new regime.

• Structural polarization — the system itself resists swapping sides

Recent research shows that polarization in Congress and among voters has deepened and become more entrenched. arXiv+1
Switching sides would feel to many like betrayal — a risky move even if the money and influence opportunities remain.

• Not all power brokers have flexible agendas

Some built business models around deregulation, “populist nationalism,” resource extraction, outsourcing — their interests might align poorly with many left-leaning policies (taxes, environmental regulations, social programs, etc.).

• Overhang of Trumpism — the ideology may outlast the man

Even if Trump falls, the ideological and institutional shifts already enacted may harden into place, making a clean pivot untenable. Foreign Analysis+1

What a Transition Could Look Like (or Fail to Look Like)

My View: Expect Partial Transitions, Not Full Conversions

I don’t expect a wholesale “right becomes left” shift — not realistically. What I do expect is a fractured adaptation:

• Some old-school GOP donors and influencers will try to migrate quietly into the center or even moderate left if it preserves profits or stability.

• Others will try to hold onto the base, banking on division, identity politics, and fear — because that’s the emotional currency that’s already been spent to build power.

• Some new networks — especially around money, tech, “dark money,” NGOs — will remain flexible, operating across partisan lines depending on what serves their interests best.

In short: the puppet-masters don’t always need the same puppets. They need heads that nod, money that flows, and power that endures