If you want to see the future of the GOP, check out a state in which the Democrats have minimal influence in government, so alliances among the factions are unnecessary. Try Texas, for example.
The important political battles in Texas pit pro-business “moderates” (in my terminology, PBPs) against social conservatives (Reactionaries). The PBP faction wants to improve education and infrastructure to help the state’s economy; the Reactionaries want bathroom bills and right-wing high school textbooks. The PBPs view the Reactionary agenda as being a distraction at best and a detriment to the state’s business-friendly reputation at worst. After a few years in which the PBPs were barely hanging on, the two factions appear to have reached some sort of an equilibrium, but the battle will continue.
You will see the same phenomenon at the national level in the coming years. The emerging question is whether Trump’s successor as leader of the GOP will be a “national conservative” with a reactionary, interventionist, pro-worker economic agenda. My guess is that the WSJ and the other PBP enforcers still have enough clout in the party to prevent that from happening in the foreseeable future, but the issue is definitely up for debate, as evidenced by Trump’s acceptance of union-supported changes to his USMCA over the objections of business interests.