When Donald Trump abruptly canceled his appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference at the last minute, it served to confirm for CPAC attendees what has become much clearer over the course of the 2016 campaign.
Trump is not a one of them. What’s more, it isn’t really clear that he believes in anything.
After the conclusion Thursday night’s presidential debate, Trump’s campaign scrambled to explain two major issues he had addressed, to make clear that Trump did not actually believe what he had just said.
First, and within minutes of the debate’s ending, the campaign sent word that Trump did not really believe what he had just said about supporting more H1B visas for skilled foreign workers. In the debate, Trump explicitly admitted that he had changed his views on the issue, and no longer agreed with his official campaign position. In its statement, the campaign asserted that Trump had not actually changed his view, which is to say, please ignore everything he just said in the debate.
The following day, another major correction came down. Trump clarified that he does not support the use of torture against terrorists anymore, despite what he had said during the debate less than 24 hours earlier, about using interrogation techniques that go even beyond waterboarding. In the debate, Trump had actually promised he could force servicemembers to obey such illegal orders, but now he had reversed his position on torture.
What is one to make of such erratic behavior? The simplest conclusion is that Trump has no core beliefs. This actually explains a lot of observed Trump phenomena. For example, his apparent malleability on immigration policy when speaking to the New York Times editorial board. It also gives context to his supposed conversions on such issues as abortion, taxes, socialized medicine, the Iraq War (which he supported but now claims to have opposed), the Libyan War (ditto), amnesty for DREAMers (which in 2013 he told Latino activists he supported), the offshoring of jobs and the Second Amendment, among others.
Come to think of it, it’s almost as if there’s a pattern here. When you boil it down, there is no there there with Trump. It is not surprising that Trump would say he believes one thing on one day, and the opposite thing the next day.
Even a matter as serious as his hesitation to repudiate David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan is not much of a surprise. He does not likely admire the men in the white hoods, but he is not so attached to this sentiment that he would risk losing a few votes by acknowledging on national television that he knows who they are and what they’re all about.
Republicans typically fight amongst themselves about when it is appropriate to adhere strictly to conservative principles and when it is better to compromise for pragmatic reasons. But Trump is different. He doesn’t deviate from principle because he doesn’t have any principles from which to deviate.
Trumpism is not a philosophy as much as it is a form of political Tourette’s. It gurgles forth from Trump’s mouth in the form of spasmodic utterances that he thinks will go over well.
This insight explains the amoral and nihilistic nature of his campaign to date. Trump’s undeniable accomplishment has been to con so many typical non-voters into believing he understands their pain and confusion. But he has also convinced many conservative regulars, far too many, that the frustrations he expresses are the same as theirs. They are not.
The problem Trump always faced at CPAC, and one reason his annual speeches were the butt of jokes, is that the conference’s attendees believe at some level in ideas. They don’t all think alike, to be sure, but issues and policy are what motivate their annual journey to Washington, as well as their day-to-day activism. Issues, policy, and philosophy are things about which Trump has nothing coherent to say.
On Friday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich greeted the news of Trump’s cancellation by justifying it. “Trump was right to skip CPAC … Why give the anti-Trump activists a target?”
Gingrich once shared a strong passion for conservative ideas and solutions. He must understand what he is doing in cynically providing cover for the man who smashing up conservatism’s intellectual foundations.
Editors note: The Washington Examiner was a co-sponsor of CPAC.
