A Myopic Shift Toward Trump Loathing for Ted Cruz fuels a cynical GOP embrace of an utterly unsuitable candidate. By William A. Galston
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-myopic-shift-toward-trump-1453853916
Fired by antipathy to Sen. Ted Cruz, which is easy to understand, the Washington Republican establishment is stampeding into the arms of Donald Trump. Prominent former members of Congress who have publicly signaled their preference for Mr. Trump include Bob Dole, Trent Lott and Newt Gingrich. A greater act of self-defeating myopia is hard to imagine.
It’s not exactly a secret that I’m a Democrat. But I’m also a citizen, and as a citizen, I’m risk-averse. I don’t want to take a chance on the future of my country. That’s why I want both parties to nominate candidates who are clearly qualified by virtue of knowledge, temperament and experience to serve as president.
Can anyone say with a straight face that Mr. Trump is such a candidate?
A much-debated issue of the National Review makes the fullest case yet that he is not, and the bill of particulars is impressive. The editors and 31 contributors demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Trump is no conservative and that his recent claims to the contrary are the political equivalent of a deathbed conversion. He backed the Obama administration’s economic stimulus and the bailouts for the banks and the automobile industry. He supports higher taxes on the wealthy and the aggressive use of eminent domain. He has spoken approvingly of single-payer health insurance, tougher gun-control legislation and Planned Parenthood.
As Russell Moore, the president of the Ethics and Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention points out, Mr. Trump has backed partial-birth abortion; he has abandoned one wife after another for a younger women while denying that he has any need to seek forgiveness; and his comments about Muslims show that his commitment to religious liberty is at best skin-deep.
If I were a conservative, this litany would be enough to make me run screaming in the opposite direction. But as the late-night ads proclaim: Wait, there’s more!
A president’s first duty is to serve as commander in chief. During the Republican presidential debates, Mark Helprin observes, Mr. Trump revealed that he was clueless about the cornerstone of America’s deterrence policy, the nuclear triad. In an interview with Hugh Hewitt months into the primary campaign, he showed his unfamiliarity with the heads of Hezbollah, al Qaeda and Islamic State, and he didn’t know the difference between the Kurds and Iran’s Quds Force. As former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey points out, Mr. Trump’s anti-Muslim statements would ensure the enmity of the Muslims whose support we need to prevail, and his declared intention of ordering the military to kill the families of terrorists would subject those who followed his orders to prosecution for war crimes. His admiration for Vladimir Putin is revealing and disqualifying.
Mr. Trump’s character also comes in for a beating at the hands of the National Review contributors. He is, they say, an opportunist, a huckster, and a demagogue; heedless and crude; brawling, blustery and mean-spirited; emotionally insecure, and needless to say, narcissistic. The redoubtable Mona Charen challenges his attitude toward women in terms that make Megyn Kelly’s questions as a debate moderator seem mild by comparison.
As for Mr. Trump’s overall political orientation, the writers charge, he is not interested in limited government or in constitutional restraints. He is obsessed with winning, regardless of the means. He believes in one-man rule. For every problem, he insists, there is a single, simple solution: He’s so smart that he can fix it—details to come, and conservatism be damned.
In a hopelessly old-fashioned gesture, the National Review editors have the temerity to remind us that Mr. Trump has never held public office. This is, they state, “not a recommendation.” The burdens and intricacies of political leadership are special, and experience in other fields is “not transferable.”
The response of the Washington political establishment is a cynical shrug: Because Mr. Trump is a man without principles, we can do business with him. And besides, he’s so clueless that he’ll need us.
Most Washington Republicans loathe Ted Cruz and believe that his candidacy would be a disaster for their party. They are probably right. But the first votes in this already endless primary campaign have yet to be cast. A number of Republican presidential hopefuls have reasonable qualifications for the office. In the aggregate, they may well command a plurality of the party. Yet the establishment is running up the white flag without even trying to unify around someone who could provide a credible alternative to both Mr. Trump and Mr. Cruz.
These are the people Mr. Trump has castigated as “stupid.” He may have a point. They are certainly shortsighted. And unless they can look the American people in the eye and make an honest case that it is safe to entrust the Oval Office to this man, they are acting dishonorably as well.
Comments are closed.
