When Donald Trump knocked first Jeb Bush and then Marco Rubio out of the Republican primary campaign, he defeated not only the candidates themselves but their common theory of what the G.O.P. should be — the idea that the party could essentially recreate George W. Bush’s political program with slightly different domestic policy ideas and recreate Bush’s political majority as well.
.. Now, after knocking Ted Cruz out of the race with a sweeping win in Indiana, Trump has beaten a second theory of where the G.O.P. needs to go from here: a theory you might call True Conservatism.
.. They wanted Reagan, or at least a fantasy version of Reagan? He would give it to them.
It didn’t work — but the truth is it almost did.
.. So give the Texas senator some credit. He took evangelical votes from Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson and Rick Santorum; he took libertarian votes from Rand Paul; he outlasted and outplayed Marco Rubio; he earned support from Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham, who once joked about his murder. Nobody worked harder; no campaign ran a tighter ship; no candidate was more disciplined.
.. Trump proved that many evangelical voters, supposedly the heart of a True Conservative coalition, are actually not really values voters or religious conservatives after all, and that the less frequently evangelicals go to church, the more likely they are to vote for a philandering sybarite instead of a pastor’s son.
.. Trump proved that many of the party’s moderates and establishmentarians hate the thought of a True Conservative nominee even more than they fear handing the nomination to a proto-fascist grotesque with zero political experience and poor impulse control.
.. Finally, Trump proved that many professional True Conservatives, many of the same people who flayed RINOs and demanded purity throughout the Obama era, were actually just playing a convenient part.
.. Cruz will be back, no doubt. He’s young, he’s indefatigable, and he can claim — and will claim, on the 2020 hustings — that True Conservatism has as yet been left untried.
Ten Reasons Moderates Should Vote for Ted Cruz
Cruz is one of the least gaffe-prone politicians in memory: He sometimes says things that have debatable returns with voters, but he almost always says exactly what he intends to say.
.. Let’s say you think — as do many moderate Republicans, and even as do many ideologically conservative but of-moderate-temperament Republicans – that, despite all of the above, Ted Cruz is a self-promoter with no loyalty to the party, a demagogue who promises unrealistic results without a plan to deliver them, and a Goldwater-sized general-election disaster in his own right waiting to happen. You’re terrified of nominating Ted Cruz. Well, guess what? Cruz isn’t going away! Trump is 70 years old ..
.. If you think Cruz is a disaster waiting to happen, better to let him happen now and have a chance at a more moderate or at least more moderate-sounding nominee next time.
.. Moreover, if Cruz loses to Hillary, conservatives will be compelled to listen. Cruz is the beau idéal of a “True Conservative,” in the prime of his career, facing an aging, unlikeable opponent with massive scandal baggage, a dynast in a populist year against a populist opponent. If he can’t beat her, the party’s conservatives will have no choice but to reassess the idea that too little conservatism has been the only problem with recent national tickets.
.. Trump is crude, ignorant, and proud of both, the sort of man who boasts about being a serial adulterer and is unafraid to insult entire races, religions, and ethnic groups. Trump’s rallies have frequently turned ugly, and he has activated an army of white supremacists (especially online) who pollute everything around them. Trump’s prominent endorsers include all sorts of disreputable and embarrassing people. He’s replaced a campaign manager who got in trouble for manhandling a female reporter with one who’s been a toady for nasty foreign dictators and has been linked to the Russian mob.
.. But Trump ascendant means a wholesale rejection of the very concept of civil debate and empiricism in favor of raw rage and fringe conspiracy theories.
.. whenever a new movement has arisen or a new coalition or alliance has been formed, one or both parties has moved to respond to it, co-opt it, provide it with more responsible leadership, and ultimately tame it. Trump’s movement can go the same way, if we nominate a leader who is responsive to those currents.
The Cult of Sore Losers
Bernie Sanders isn’t losing. Just ask many of his backers or listen to some of his own complaints. He’s being robbed, a victim of antiquated rules, voter suppression, shady arithmetic and a corrupt Democratic establishment.
.. Donald Trump isn’t winning. Just ask Ted Cruz, by whose strange and self-serving logic it is “the will of the people” (his actual words) that he and John Kasich collude to prevent Trump from amassing a majority of delegates ..
.. Elections don’t settle disputes, not even for some fleeting honeymoon. They accelerate them, because there’s a pernicious insistence that they’re not referendums on the public mood but elaborate board games in which the triumphant player used the wickedest skulduggery.
When you honestly believe or disingenuously assert that you’ve been outmaneuvered rather than outvoted, why declare a truce, let alone cooperate, in the aftermath?
.. But all of the candidates knew about that patchwork going in, and Clinton’s successful navigation of it — she has a multi-million-vote lead over Sanders — is more persuasive than any dark claims of dastardly tricks.
Another Big Curveball in an Unpredictable Year: The Cruz-Fiorina Option
A caller to Rush Limbaugh yesterday, laying out why he prefers Trump to Cruz:
We’re sick and tired of fighting with people who won’t fight, and when it comes to down to Cruz, you know, my instincts with Cruz is that, yeah, he’s a nice guy. And don’t get me wrong, if he magically wins this nomination, of course I’ll support him. But the problem is, I suspect he won’t fight. Three days ago there was an article in Breitbart where he’s being interviewed and he said, “You know, if I’m elected,” he said something to that effect of, “I’m not gonna get personal. This is gonna be about issues.”
Okay, great. You just handed them the election, ‘cause you know what they’re gonna do? They’re gonna make it personal against you and you’re gonna be like the new George Bush just sitting up there like Jeb. You won’t fight. You’ll just sit there and take it and we’re gonna lose again. And the thing is, Trump, you know what? I disagree with probably 80% of the stuff that he believes in, or he purports to. But the thing is, I think we’re facing an existential crisis. It comes down to immigration, illegal immigration and Obamacare.
Think about this: Cruz, the man probably most responsible for the government shutdown, is perceived as a guy who won’t fight — on Obamacare, no less!
.. I don’t understand how you can look at Ted Cruz and, out of all possible flaws, conclude he isn’t willing to fight for what he believes in. (His flaw is more likely the opposite, quixotic fights and antagonism to potential allies that isn’t helpful in the long run.)
.. Secondly, if you elect a ferocious fighter who you disagree with on four out of five issues, it means he’ll be fighting ferociously against you on four out of five issues. You’ve empowered a guy who you mostly disagree with in the hopes that he really comes through on that 20 percent. (Somehow I suspect the caller isn’t focusing extensively on the “touchback amnesty” portion of Trump’s immigration plan.