In his first press conference following the 2018 midterm elections, President Trump again made one thing perfectly clear: This is his show. You are either with him or you are against him.
While it is his show, is it his party? Maybe not entirely.
Trump will face a primary challenger in 2020, if not several. Governor John Kasich of Ohio is dropping broad hints, while some others are talking up the chances of Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. There could be other contenders as well who haven’t yet expressed interest, such as Sens. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, or Ben Sasse, R-Neb. Given current dynamics, beating Trump in a 2020 primary is possible, but not necessarily easy.
The politicos predicting and plotting Trump’s downfall are the same ones who dismissed his ascent. They falsely believe that if the mistakes of 2016 can be highlighted, his defeat will be assured. Yes, there were many factors that aided his election: a disbelieving press, his opponents’ over-reliance on data, a deeply flawed Democratic challenger with an atrocious battle plan, potential Russia meddling, etc.
But even with all these factors considered, historically speaking, Trump is still in a very strong position. The last incumbent president to lose renomination was Chester A. Arthur in 1884, but he was an unelected president, having succeeded the assassinated James Garfield. More recently, Harry Truman was chased from the field in 1952 by Senator Estes Kefauver after a scare in the New Hampshire primary, as was Lyndon Johnson in 1968 by peace candidate Sen. Gene McCarthy of Minnesota, again after the challenger startled the incumbent in the Granite State. Franklin Pierce was the last man to be nominated and then elected president and then denied renomination in 1856, when the Democrats turned to James Buchanan.
In 1992, Pat Buchanan’s fringe candidacy nonetheless weakened former President George H.W. Bush for the fall campaign to Bill Clinton, but Bush was also badly damaged by the third-party candidacy of Ross Perot. In 1980, Sen. Ted Kennedy mounted an early and impressive challenge to incumbent Jimmy Carter, but he faltered quickly under the glare of national media attention and his own campaign’s many mistakes, the specter of Chappaquiddick, and Carter’s tenacious campaign.
For any Republican contemplating a challenge to Trump, the best case to examine is Ronald Reagan’s nearly unprecedented challenge of Gerald Ford for the 1976 GOP nomination.
Ford was an unelected incumbent, and so no Republican nationwide had made a psychic investment by casting a vote for him except in one congressional district in Michigan. This explains why many Republicans stuck by the divisive Richard Nixon to the bitter end. Many had voted for him five times by 1974 and were not ready to abandon him until the notorious “smoking gun” tape clearly showed him orchestrating a cover-up of the Watergate break-in. Only then did Nixon’s last vestiges of support melt away. Underreported is the fact that by August of 1974, the economy was also in a full-blown recession, which further hastened Nixon’s demise. Gerald Ford ascended to the presidency, the first man in history to do so without ever receiving votes as a presidential or vice presidential candidate.
Thus, Ford’s hold on the GOP was tenuous, mostly a result of incumbency and the majesty of the office. It was not because he articulated any great ideas.
Reagan had been thinking about the presidency since he was elected governor of California in 1966. He ran a last-minute, ragtag effort in 1968 for the GOP nod, but Nixon had done his homework and won the nomination and eventually the election. Beginning in 1964 and his groundbreaking speech for Barry Goldwater, Reagan had been on the road continuously, speaking to all manner of audiences. But that hadn’t been enough. After he left the governorship in January 1975, he was heard five times a week doing five-minute commentaries on radio stations across America. King Feature syndicated his twice-weekly column, avidly read by many. He was also frequently on the Sunday and the evening shows. The result was that Reagan became ubiquitous and was the most popular conservative in America.
Meanwhile, by 1974 Ford was the leader of a shrinking and broken Republican Party. Conservative movement figures like Richard Viguerie were more important and more consequential to national political reporters, than say, Bill Brock, chairman of the GOP.
Ford’s initial burst of popularity went down quickly after he pardoned Nixon. The economy was still in poor shape, and the stench of Watergate hung over the GOP as they lost dozens of seats in the 1974 off-year elections. After 1974, only Kansas had GOP control of the governorship and the state legislature. The other 49 states had near or total Democratic control. As the klieg lights shone brightly on Ford, he was often shown to be bumbling, bumping his head, falling down jet ramps, and making malapropisms. The phrase “Bozo” was often used to describe Ford and his accidental presidency. He also retained conservative boogieman Henry Kissinger as secretary of state and continued Nixon’s detente policies with the Soviets.
Ford, the establishment figure who had fallen badly in the polls, appeared ripe for the picking for the outsider populist conservative, Ronald Reagan.
But Reagan needed a signature issue, one that people could freely associate with his candidacy. And fortunately for the Californian, the Panama Canal Treaties emerged at the right time. Kissinger and the Ford administration were negotiating with the dictatorship of Panama to hand over control of the canal that Americans had built and maintained since Theodore Roosevelt’s administration. American schoolchildren grew up learning about the seventh Wonder of the World, the Panama Canal, the first expression of Pax Americana.
On the stump, Reagan thundered, “We built it! We paid for it! It’s ours! And we are going to keep it!” Audiences went wild. In a time of Soviet advances and American retreats, the West was losing the Cold War to the East and the giveaway of the canal just seemed to be one more in a succession of surrenders. Even so, with all the resources at his command, these powers weren’t enough for Reagan, even as he collected more votes in the contested primaries than did Ford.
Reagan entered the race and earned live and unprecedented network news coverage of his announcement at the National Press Club. He narrowly lost the first five primaries (though he probably won the New Hampshire primary if some 2,000 spoiled ballots and the 1,000 Democrats who wrote in his name were counted) but scored a huge upset in North Carolina over Ford. Reagan was off the mat and rolling, all the way to the Kansas City GOP convention where, by hook, crook, and shenanigans in the Mississippi, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois delegations he suffered a very narrow defeat: 1,187 to 1,170.
Still, he had much to show for his losing, though important effort. Reagan was never one for tilting at windmills. If he hadn’t run that race and learned a lot about both presidential campaigns and the country, he never would have run and won in 1980.
Having said all this, Trump is no Gerald Ford. His hold on the GOP is much, much stronger than that of the 38th president’s. And none of the potential candidates possess Reagan’s deep well of support, his sunny demeanor, or his long standing in the conservative movement. That movement is now at least in part supportive of Trump because of the tax cuts, the Supreme Court nominees, and his willingness to take on the liberal opposition.
A challenger would have to work fast and make the case that Trump is no conservative, which at this point would be especially difficult. The case would have to go something like this: Trump supports federal subsidies for ethanol and corporate seizure of private property as expressed by the Supreme Court’s Kelo decision. Trump favors the increased regulation of cigarettes, he’s exploded our national debt, and his administration has made the D.C. swamp deeper. Beyond the 2016 election, Trump has never been a consistent conservative. In the past, he’s given generously to Planned Parenthood, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, and Chuck Schumer, along with multiple Democrats and liberal causes.
But it’s not enough to knock Trump. A challenger will also need to also make the case for American conservatism that advances freedom, liberty, and the dignity of the private individual. They need to articulate that conservatism isn’t some hodgepodge of soundbites and angry tweets; it’s a coherent philosophy that can guide an entire life. It affirms the primacy of the intellectual individual before the mindless state. Or as Russell Kirk said, “From the moment I began to think and the time I began to reason, I have always been a conservative.”
If primaried, Trump will in all likelihood be renominated, although nothing is assured. But that does not mean his challenger will gain nothing. Reagan lost in 1968 and 1976, and then he went on to win in 1980. The two losses made him a better candidate and ultimately a better president. Sometimes, like Reagan, one must first lose in the short term in order to win in the long term.
Craig Shirley is the author of five books about the life and work of former President Ronald Reagan. His public relations firm, Shirley & Banister, worked briefly for John Kasich’s presidential campaign in 2016.
