The boss shares some advice for 2016 pessimists in this week’s Kristol Clear newsletter. (Don’t get it? Sign up for free today!)
Cheer up! he writes:
“Mixing and mingling at various get-togethers over New Year’s weekend (and, boy, as you can imagine, the New Year’s gatherings I attend are wild and crazy affairs!), I was struck by how pessimistic my fellow Republicans and conservatives are about 2016. They think 2015 was a disaster for the GOP, and that our next president is going to be Hillary. The only thing worth discussing is how (or if) we can survive the next four years.
Clearly, these party-goers hadn’t yet read my editorial in the current issue–which offers grounds for hope, and not, I think, wishful thinking. As I point out:
These numbers, by the way, are from the Real Clear Politics polling averages; there was no cherry-picking of polls to make my point. But it is remarkable that the media have decided to ignore what may turn out to be the politically consequential development of 2015–the potentially catastrophic drop in Hillary Clinton’s approval numbers, and her failure, despite a still-large advantage in name identification, to run ahead at this point of her likely GOP rivals.
Of course, the reason the media have been able to ignore Clinton’s troubles is the same reason my fellow New Year’s revelers (okay, my fellow New Year’s mix-and-minglers) were pessimistic: Donald Trump. But will he be the nominee? It’s true that if he is, Republicans and conservatives face some challenges (and we still haven’t settled on the name and mascot for the third party–suggestions welcome here). But I doubt we’ll face this predicament. It’s perfectly true Trump has made a huge splash. One reason his support has been stickier than many of us anticipated is, I think, a deep distrust that any other candidate will bring about the kind of major and radical change in politics-as-usual that many voters want. They’re sticking with Trump because they disbelieve the other, more conventional candidates. When (if?) one or more of the other candidates lays out a serious agenda for major change, I think the Trump phenomenon will wilt.
The problem is in part this: Because Trump isn’t running a policy-heavy campaign, it’s hard for the other candidates to realize that the way to beat him is to run a policy-heavy campaign in which the policy is in the service of radical change. Then Trump voters would feel as if their message has been heard, and their concerns have found a more serious standard-bearer. If the other candidates merely try to compete with Trump at the level of soundbites, and appear (like Trump) not to have thought seriously about how to bring about major change…then voters will just stick with Trump, since he has the most colorful soundbites.
But assuming Trump is defeated, one can ask, won’t he have done so much damage to the Republican brand that victory in November will be more difficult? I doubt it. There’s no particular reason to think, after three general election debates, that Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz or Chris Christie or whomever will be particularly tainted, if that’s the word, by long-ago statements by Donald Trump. And in fact one could argue that Trump may bring new voters into the GOP fold whom a capable and imaginative GOP nominee who’s not Trump will keep there by speaking to their concerns. It would be wonderful irony if, after all the fretting about Trump (and we’ve done our share), he ends up helping the GOP in 2016. As long as he’s not the nominee…”
