Back at the Broadmoor
I’m writing this at the Broadmoor, where I’m speaking to a couple of dozen Republican State Attorneys General (or Attorney Generals, if you prefer an incorrect but perhaps more colloquial formulation). My sense from the reception last night is that most are unhappy about Donald Trump–but as state officials who can avoid, to some degree, being involved in federal campaigns, they’re keeping their heads down and hoping just to muddle through the next few months and have the Republican Party emerge okay at the other side. I’m dubious (as I discuss below), but we’ll see.
Of course at this kind of gathering of elected officials, staff and supporters, there’s endless gossip about the question of the day, Trump’s VP pick. There seemed to be a consensus among those are in touch with senior Trump aides, or have seen Trump himself at small gatherings, that his staff–ranging from Paul Manafort to Kellyanne Conway to Corey Lewandowski– want Trump to take Indiana governor Mike Pence as a safe pick who will help bring conservatives home. Trump is reportedly resisting, and is intrigued by the idea a general (Mike Flynn or Stanley McChrystal) or some other “bigger” pick like Newt Gingrich. I wonder if Texas Governor Greg Abbott wouldn’t hit the sweet spot between these two concerns…though of course I’m not in the business of giving Donald Trump advice on his vice presidential pick.
Being at the Broadmoor of course brings back fond memories of this spring’s Summit, one of our best ever, I think. And it allows me to point out that you should save the date for next spring’s Summit, which will take place May 18-20, 2017. (Registration will be open soon!) And it reminds me to remind you to sign up for our December Caribbean cruise, which will feature nice weather, a chance to look forward after the election, and a stellar cast of guest speakers, including Mary Katharine Ham, Mollie Hemingway, Matt Continetti, and Kirsten Powers, as well as the terrific cartoonist Michael Ramirez, who will both speak and cartoonize (or whatever the verb is). They’ll of course be joined by TWS regulars like Fred Barnes, Steve Hayes, Jonathan Last, Mark Hemingway, Mike Warren, John McCormack, and me.
The cruise will be taking place at an interesting moment, to say the least. When we depart Ft. Lauderdale on December 4, the battle for the White House will have been decided, but a new era requiring fresh thinking and acting will be just beginning. So this cruise will be a little different from some of our past ones–less focused on short-term politics, and more about big ideas and future challenges. I do hope you can join us. For more information, and to register, go to weeklystandardcruise.com.
***
ADVERTISEMENT
***
Why Not Trump?
I was in New York for a day and a half last week for various activities, including several hours teaching at a summer program for first-rate college students, with a fair amount of time set aside just to talk with them. The class wasn’t on contemporary American politics, but of course the conversation drifted in that direction. What struck me above all from talking with this admittedly small and unrepresentative sample is the damage Donald Trump, and especially if he’s ultimately supported by the vast majority of Republicans and conservatives, could do to the future of the Republican Party, and to the reputation of conservatism among the brightest of the next generation.
If you’re older, you know that in recent decades the Republican Party, for all its faults, has had some impressive leaders, and has been right about most–not all, but most–of the big issues. Similarly, you know that the conservative movement has been a force for good for this country and the world. And so you can take your bearing from this history, and regard Trump as an unfortunate, one-off mistake.
But it you’re 20 years old, President Reagan and Prime Minister Thatcher and Justice Scalia and so many others are mere figures in the history books. Meanwhile, some of the best known conservatives who are still alive and well are ruining their reputations by their current rationalizing of Trump (Gingrich, for example, or Giuliani). So the damage Trump could do among younger Americans, and the difficulty of recovering from it, shouldn’t be underestimated.
Thus my editorial this week, “Neither of the Above.” And thus my post online yesterday arguing that Mitt Romney or John Kasich should make clear to the convention they are willing to accept the nomination if the delegates reject Trump. This would reassure some delegates who are nervous that if they exercise the right they have to use their judgment in voting for a presidential nominee, there will be chaos. There is a chance the convention will reject Trump, and we’ll be reporting over the next week on these efforts, as well as arguing about what should be happening there, so do check the website regularly. And if you’re so inclined, you can follow the magazine as well as Steve Hayes, Mike Warren, John McCormack, Jay Cost, me, and other colleagues on Twitter. I’m told that after joining Twitter, the easiest way to follow TWS writers is to subscribe to our TWS staff list, which you can find here. Those not inclined to join Twitter can still read the latest by clicking here.
***
Doing Our Job
I remember one incident shortly after we started the magazine. We’d published a piece, and some of its reporting, its arguments and even its examples and formulations had been reproduced in an article in a major newspaper. I grumbled at an editorial meeting that it was great they were reading us and agreeing with us, but that it would have been nice to have gotten some acknowledgment. Fred Barnes, experienced at working at a weekly magazine of politics and ideas, laughed and said, “You take your influence how you can get it. Sometimes you’ll be mentioned. But that won’t always happen. Still, when you see they’ve read you and been influenced by you, even or especially if they choose not to mention you, you can see we’re doing our job.”
And to supplement Fred’s point: In the give and take of daily and weekly journalism, it is foolish to be sensitive about getting credit–all kinds of ideas and examples get swapped back and forth, and I’m sure others have griped about our appropriation of things as well. (All of this of course assumes nothing truly inappropriate like plagiarism.)
I was reminded of Fred’s wisdom yesterday, when the Washington Post had an excellent editorial on Trump, Saddam, and terrorism. Their editors know a lot about this topic, and of course were perfectly capable of making this argument on their own–but it’s also clear they were influenced, as they should have been, by Steve Hayes’s definitive blog post from earlier in the week. Part of doing our job, as Fred would say.
***
Baseball and politics
Finally, in honor of the all-star break (though I think it’s been thirty years since I watched an all-star game), here’s an interesting column from Tom Boswell in yesterday’s Washington Post, on the Nats’ and Mets’ contrasting management of their young pitchers. It’s one of those cases of head vs. heart: one is sympathetic to the Mets’ old-school tough-it-out attitude, but the evidence seems to support the Nats’ more modern and humane approach. Read it for yourself and decide. It’s more interesting than the all-star game itself.
And so: Next week in Cleveland! (Or as a friend from there insists on calling it every time he mentions it, “Cleveland, City of Champions.” I guess when you haven’t won a championship in over a half century, you’re entitled to go on a bit.) I’ll be there Sunday for This Week with George Stephanopoulos, then will be staying for the convention itself, along with many TWS and Washington Examiner colleagues. The convention could be exciting, invigorating, and heartening if the delegates produce a nominee other than Donald Trump–it could be, as I’ve been saying on Twitter, the Glorious Convention of 2016.
Or it could be totally depressing and demoralizing. Well, as John McCain (paraphrasing Mao and Paul Newman) likes to say, “It’s always darkest before it turns pitch black.”
***
Onward!
Bill Kristol
