As the Democratic Party is fully aligned, arrayed and enthusiastic behind the Harris-Walz ticket, there appears to be growing discontent on the right with the Trump-Vance campaign as we head into tonight’s debate — as highlighted in a new piece in the New York Times. Finger pointing is already in full force among different factions of the right, which could lead to an all-out brawl if Harris does well in tonight’s debate.

The Times article focuses a lot on recent comments by Paul Dans, the former director of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 and architect of the initiative’s 900-page “Mandate for Leadership” playbook, who was canned after Project 2025 got too toxic for the Trump campaign, and he doesn’t seem to be a happy camper. In his first public statements since leaving the project, Dans lashed out at the key advisors of the Trump campaign, Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles, accusing them of committing “malpractice” and saying that “the campaign is made up of political animals who don’t care about the ideological wing of the conservative movement.” 

“Trump should be running like Secretariat at the Belmont, but instead it’s a race to the wire,” Mr. Dans said.

His complaints reflect a discontent that has been simmering for weeks among a faction of Mr. Trump’s supporters on the right. Several media figures, activists and former Trump administration officials say they are worried by what they see as strategic mistakes this summer, followed by the campaign’s overtures to the center as it seeks to win over swing voters.

Dans expresses a tremendous level of frustration and anger at how the Heritage Foundation mismanaged the rollout if Project 2025 and how the Trump campaign distanced itself from the initiative — all thanks to the Harris-Walz campaign’s deft use of the extremist, far-right playbook to their advantage.

Although Democrats first seized on the document a year ago, it didn’t gain traction as an attack line until early July, when the Heritage Foundation’s president, Kevin Roberts, said in a podcast interview that the country was “in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.”

The remark went viral, and three days later Mr. Trump used Truth Social to disown Project 2025, claiming that he had “no idea who is behind it” and that “some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.”

Mr. Dans said he was blindsided by the post, which he called an inadvertent signal to Democrats to push even harder to tie Mr. Trump to Project 2025.

“They took the bait,” Mr. Dans said of the campaign leadership. He pointed to comments by Mr. LaCivita at the Republican National Convention, where he called Project 2025 a “pain in the ass” and said that the people behind it “do not speak for the campaign.”

To add salt to the wound, Dans and other conservative loyalists behind Project 2025 are upset that the Trump campaign installed Linda McMahon, chair of the America First Policy Institute, on its transition team. The Insittute, a conservative think tank, has been working on a transition blueprint completely separate from the one made by Project 2025 — driving a further wedge in the conservative movement.

Dans is also critical, of course, of the Trump campaign’s attempts, lame as they may be, to moderate their stance on abortion. And he criticized the campaign for agreeing to a presidential debate in early June, which gave the Dems time to replace Biden, and for not being prepared for Biden dropping out and endorsing Harris. 

Neither (Trump) adviser appeared to believe it was possible that the president would actually drop out. In July, just 11 days before Mr. Biden’s departure, Mr. LaCivita was quoted in The Atlantic as saying Mr. Biden “doesn’t look like he’s going anywhere.”

Mr. Dans called that a sign of arrogance. “They pushed Biden off the stage and they had no plans for Harris,” Mr. Dans said. “That is on par with historic campaign malpractice.”

The article also quotes Raheem Kassam, editor in chief of The National Pulse, a right-wing news site, who claims that LaCivita and Wiles are most concerned with their opportunity for personal gain from the campaign. “I really don’t think Chris and Susie care if they win. I’ve never gotten that vibe,” he said. Also, Tim Chapman, president of the conservative policy group Advancing American Freedom, called the Trump campaign’s mishandling of Project 2025 a “rude awakening about the reality of politics.” How about a rude awakening on the realities of living in the year 2024?

Dans expressed serious concerns that all of the campaign’s missteps are causing it to lose too much support from grassroots conservatives — which the campaign can’t afford as it heads into the final stretch.

“Who is going to work the polls? Who is going to fight for you?” Mr. Dans said. “There’s no transition without winning and there’s no winning without those loyalists putting their boots on the ground.”

I’m trying to hold back tears here. If Trump does not do well in tonight’s debate, it could lead to further fissures on the right heading into the final weeks of the campaign. Here’s hoping.