I honestly don't know where to answer this, since it seems to cover the scope of both threads, but as you say
I get that it's a very American viewpoint
and, well, it is, I find it fitting to answer here.
First of all, liking (or voting for, at any rate) Trump for Catholics is a complete anomaly. Most of the Church is anything but
fascist (well, I suppose it depends on your definition of the term as well), but yeah, there are "conservatives" and "progressives" in the Church, but they don't always follow the same dichotomy in secular politics.
There are many Church conservatives (me among them) who are vehementy anti-racist, don't want too much of a state control over its citizens, care for the poor and the downtrodden (and generally are quite "left", economically) and are against death penalty, for example. Let alone being disgusted at Trump being downright
vulgar.
The conservativism may instead be oriented towards a more spectacular liturgy, the ordination of female deacons and so on, but it doesn't always fit with the secular world and especially US conservatism.
Bear in mind that one of the beacons of "conservative thought" within the church, Chesterton, was against Socialism AND Capitalism and actually came with the idea of
Distributism, which is supposed to take as much as possible from Catholic social teaching and to repair the faults of both Socialism and Capitalism (and the underlying materialism).
However, over time, US Catholics have made strange bedfellows with US Evangelicals, mainly because they seemed to follow certain similar goals and they felt similarly underrepresented in the US society (which is nothing new, William F. Buckley, Jr. wrote his
God and Man at Yale about the aggressive secularisation of academia in
1951). Together they fought the devil of unbridled abortion desire, together they fought the devil of unrestricted immigration, no-go zones and the feeling of lack of safety within the city limits, together they fought wokism, kids painting flags of their orientation and their gender in primary school and so on. Before you accuse me of conservative dogwhistling - I am merely describing, I say what people feel and why they act accordingly.
I do have contact with US Catholics, many of them
haven't voted for Trump (and went for
American Solidarity Party, the US Catholic party in all but name, instead or haven't voted at all) or did so with a certain amount of distrust and revulsion - but got convinced he is the lesser evil. (I'm merely describing, I don't condone the opinion). But they shouldn't have to. Honestly, being only slightly less bloodthirsty in the abortion crusade, Dems would have scored quite a bit of Catholics regardless.
Which is why
this will probably also drive a wedge within the Catholic church if Pope Leo becomes a foil for Trump
I don't fear this. I think most will take the Pope over Trump.
However
I have a hard time not seeing this as an intentional statement from the church about the state of American politics.
this I believe is also true. It is a reaction to Trump, I think, and what's more - it isn't just a knee-jerk reaction, but an actual alternative, someone who is against Trump in many ways, but isn't just the political opposite - on the contrary, by picking the name Leo XIV and using traditional vestments, it is an extended hand to the "conservative" wing of the Church, to show they don't have to be (and should not be) American first, right-wing second and Catholic only third, but that there is always a third way.
Pope Leo is now the second most influential American world leader, so it'll be interesting to see how that plays out during the remainder of Trump's term.
I wonder - as there are over a billion Catholics worldwide, on every continent (some put the number as high as a billion and a half), I'd argue that Leo is going to be the single most influential American ever, currently.
Definitely more influential than Trump who (deservedly) gets opposition
even in his own party. Sure, the Pope has no nukes, but still..
