I enjoyed this read, but don't have much to add. I was, however, blown away that America First came from an NYT reporter. I assumed based on the media reports I heard that his team resurrected AF slyly as a nod to its history. I had no idea of its real origin story as a question from a reporter. That shows the better than anything I've seen of the superficiality with which Trump operates. We see all these loosely correlated ravings emanating from him and his inner circle , and assume that there has to be a 'there' there, but there isn't. There's a guy of below average intelligence and above average self worth reacting without hesitation or embarrassment to the shit the world flings at him. he world view we want to ascribe to him at least has an internal logic (and that's probably why we need it to be true), but I'm not sure it exists. I think he's just a political lamprey.
To the contrary, I see most people arguing that they're the first step towards fascism.
That is a fair concern, although I doubt it's the first step for him and the USA. Several steps are being taken at once. I liked this article from those search results, particularly the comments about the media's reluctance during the election campaign to call Trump what he is.
L Ron Hubbard wrote a story in Astounding Magazine back in the late '50s where he argued that the quickest path to riches was not investment or business acumen but starting a cult. Two years later he wrote Dianetics. Frontline's piece on Trump/Clinton is an impressive piece of media that doesn't paint Trump as a fascist. It identifies him as a bully that has never had to tell the truth so he doesn't. He's gotten to where he is by indulging his instinct for self-flattery and he's always been big enough to avoid burning out. But then, he's surrounded by sycophants with their own agendas so what we're left with is a bull in a china shop surrounded by ideologues with red capes.