Hung Cao Confirmed as Under Secretary of the Navy: A Clear Win for Conservative Leadership
Retired U.S. Navy Captain Hung Cao has been confirmed as under secretary of the Navy, and for Republicans this feels like a sensible pick finally taking a seat it deserves. Cao ran for the Senate last year and lost, but his confirmation shows conservative values can still translate into appointments that strengthen our military. This is a win both for principled service and for an administration that promised to prioritize experience and toughness.
Senate Vote and the Lone GOP No
The Senate voted 52 to 45 in favor of Cao’s confirmation, and the numbers tell a clear story about a focused Republican push to put experienced leaders back into the Pentagon. Only one Republican opposed him, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, and her lone dissent stood out to conservatives who view Cao as a correct-minded leader. “I was not comfortable offering my support based upon my review of his background and his qualifications,” Murkowski told the Washington Examiner.
Murkowski’s statement will be criticized by many on the right who see Cao’s long record of service as more than enough to qualify him for the post. In a moment where the Navy and the Pentagon are being asked to do more with clearer mission focus, Republicans argued the choice of a veteran with combat and Pentagon experience is overdue. The vote margin shows the GOP can coalesce around nominees who match the party’s priorities on readiness and traditional values.
Trump’s Endorsement and Cao’s Record
President Trump publicly praised Cao and cast him as the embodiment of the American dream when he promoted him on social media this year. “As a refugee to our Great Nation, Hung worked tirelessly to make proud the Country that gave his family a home. He went to our amazing United States Naval Academy and later earned his Master’s degree in Physics,” Trump said, highlighting a classic conservative storyline of hard work, military service, and upward mobility.
Trump went on to underscore Cao’s frontline experience and Pentagon background. “Hung served in combat as a Special Operations Officer for twenty five years” before adding, “With Hung’s experience both in combat, and in the Pentagon, he will get the job done.” Those are not empty phrases for voters who want leaders who have seen war, understand logistics, and can cut through bureaucratic drift.
Cao’s biography reads like a service-centered Republican resume: refugee roots, elite military education, advanced technical study, and decades in uniform. That combination appeals to the party’s base because it mixes meritocracy with service, a contrast to the culture-focused priorities some critics have pushed in recent years. Republicans argue the Navy needs that kind of practical leadership to restore focus on strength and mission, not experiments.
He previously challenged Democratic leaders in contested elections, running for the Senate last year and for a House seat two years earlier, and those campaigns sharpened his public profile. Losing an election did not erase the policy positions he pushed or the experience he built; instead it reinforced his credentials as a fighter willing to take on entrenched views. Many conservatives see confirmation to an executive role as a better fit for his temperament and skill set than the messy compromises of electoral politics.
One of Cao’s signature stands has been his blunt rejection of certain DEI-style recruiting tactics, and that stance resonated with traditionalists worried about distraction in the ranks. He argued the military should be about combat readiness and mission success rather than social experimentation, and that perspective drives much of the support he earned among Republican voters. That viewpoint feeds into a broader debate over what counts as preparation for war and what counts as political theater.
He didn’t shy away from colorful language while making his case on recruiting and culture, and that bothered some but energized others. “When you’re using a drag queen to recruit for the Navy, that’s not the people we want,” he said in a televised debate, using blunt rhetoric to underline a clear point about image and mission. And he continued with a memorable line aimed at the warrior ethos he believes the military needs: “What we need is alpha males and alpha females who are going to rip out their own guts, eat ’em and ask for seconds. Those are young men and women that are going to win wars.”
Critics called his remarks crude, but supporters said the plain talk is necessary to reset priorities and push back on signal-focused outreach. He also warned against concentrating on identity concerns when core material needs in the ranks are obvious. Cao pointed out the disconnect with a stark statistic, saying the military should pay attention to the fact that “one-third of our enlisted ranks are either on WIC [Women, Infants and Children supplemental nutrition program] or food stamps.”
Those comments framed his broader argument: caring for service members means focusing on food, housing, training, and readiness, not pronoun debates. He said the military’s energy should go into shoring up basic family supports and eliminating obstacles to retention and combat effectiveness. That practical approach appeals to conservatives who want policy measures that improve the force rather than signal virtue.
Now installed in the under secretary role, Cao will be watched closely by Republicans who expect him to prioritize readiness, recruit quality candidates, and push back on programs they see as distractions. His tenure will be judged on practical changes and on whether he can translate his battlefield and Pentagon experience into reform. For a party that prizes strength and clarity, this confirmation is a moment to prove those words mean action, not just rhetoric.
