MAGA branding backfires on Instant Pot

A MAGA branding plan for the Instant Pot sparked backlash and underscored the risks of mixing politics with a popular kitchen product.

MAGA branding backfires on Instant Pot

Two months ago, a post in the r/instantpot community claimed Instant Brands, now owned by Centre Lane Partners, planned a MAGA branded model to fund a presidential library. The claim, reported by Semafor and later picked up by The New York Times, said the product never reached production because permission from the Trump Organization was not secured. Still, the idea lingered in online discussions and highlighted the broader risk of tying a household appliance to political messaging.

In the marketplace, the episode exposed longer challenges for Instant Pot. Shifting kitchen habits and competition from air fryers have already eroded some of its shine. Bettina Makalintal, writing for Eater in 2018, noted how the device moved from hype to hobby and then to a crowded used market. The Times later linked the MAGA story to a broader pattern: branding that signals politics can alienate loyal users, distract from product utility, and complicate investor sentiment. The piece also drew a parallel to Elon Musk and Tesla, where political positioning has amplified controversy and market reaction, even when the underlying product remains solid.

This episode shows a core risk for brands: politics is a two edged blade. It can draw attention and shape culture, but it can also fracture trust and shrink a loyal customer base. When a product becomes a vehicle for a political stance, its value as a kitchen tool can fade into the background. Companies should consider the hit to credibility and the potential cost to sales before pursuing provocative branding.

Looking ahead, brands may seek a clearer path that emphasizes usefulness and reliability over public signaling. The kitchen marketplace is quick to reward simplicity and quality, and a return to neutral branding could help rebuild affection for a product that once defined a category. The case also serves as a caution for investors and marketers: public signals matter and misaligned messaging can linger longer than a single campaign.

Highlights

Great brands survive when products speak for themselves, not the politics around them.