Why Republicans Kill Their Darlings

Every time they seem to settle on a new standard-bearer, they find a reason to excommunicate him. What’s a 2016 presidential hopeful to do?

WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 15: U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) arrives at the Senate Republican Policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol October 15, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The U.S. government shutdown is entering its 15th day as the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives remain gridlocked on funding the federal government. 
Getty Images
Marin Cogan
See more stories about...
Marin Cogan
Oct. 24, 2013, 5 p.m.

What’s a GOP pres­id­en­tial hope­ful to do? In the past year, the party has cycled through one fa­vor­ite as­pir­ant after an­oth­er be­fore run­ning in­to a prob­lem: There’s no longer a single con­sensus about what makes a good can­did­ate. In­ev­it­able de­vi­ations from con­ser­vat­ive or­tho­doxy are seen as dis­qual­i­fy­ing sins. Re­pub­lic­ans have a habit of killing their darlings.

Ted Cruz seemed to have the right idea. To be­come the tea party’s fa­vor­ite can­did­ate, he out­flanked the en­tire Sen­ate GOP. But that vic­tory came at the cost of a pub­lic twice as likely to view him un­fa­vor­ably as fa­vor­ably and ser­i­ous an­ger from with­in his own party — so much that it’s dif­fi­cult to en­vi­sion him win­ning the nom­in­a­tion in 2016, let alone the pres­id­ency. Be­fore him, the im­mensely pop­u­lar Marco Ru­bio was the party’s fa­vor­ite can­did­ate, un­til he com­mit­ted the un­par­don­able sin of work­ing to pass im­mig­ra­tion re­form. Be­fore that, it was Chris Christie, whom the GOP ad­ored un­til he got a little too cozy with the pres­id­ent in the wake of Hur­ricane Sandy. It’s enough to make Rand Paul seem like their best op­tion — un­til you con­sider that he’s angered the tea party by sup­port­ing im­mig­ra­tion re­form, the es­tab­lish­ment by es­pous­ing isol­a­tion­ist for­eign policy views, and his own liber­tari­an base by sup­port­ing Mitt Rom­ney in 2012. Veer right, you’re damned; veer left, you’re jammed; play it up the cen­ter, you’re toast.

The cycle of anoint­ment and re­pu­di­ation echoes the 2012 GOP primar­ies, when Re­pub­lic­ans el­ev­ated one can­did­ate after an­oth­er: Michele Bach­mann, Her­man Cain, Newt Gin­grich, Rick Perry, and Rick San­tor­um. When voters fi­nally settled on Rom­ney, the can­did­ate had lower fa­vor­ab­il­ity and high­er un­fa­vor­ab­il­ity rat­ings than any pres­id­en­tial nom­in­ee in mod­ern his­tory.

GOP strategist Rick Wilson calls this “the High­lander the­ory,” after the ‘90s TV show about the Scot­tish war­ri­or who needs to be­head oth­er im­mor­tals be­cause there can be only one. Ted Cruz be­came The One by ec­lipsing Ru­bio, who had as­cen­ded only a few months earli­er. “Ted Cruz and Marco Ru­bio made sim­il­ar mis­takes in op­pos­ite dir­ec­tions,” says Ben Dome­nech, a seni­or fel­low at the Heart­land In­sti­tute and the pub­lish­er of The Fed­er­al­ist. “Ru­bio ob­vi­ously tacked to­ward the cen­ter with a push for com­ing to­geth­er on im­mig­ra­tion policy, and that did dam­age to his stand­ing with the con­ser­vat­ive base. Cruz on the oth­er hand tacked to the right in a way that helped his stand­ing with base but hurt [his] stand­ing with cent­rists who had been pre­vi­ously open to the idea of him.”

This di­vi­sion in the party — with the Right driv­ing for pur­ity and the es­tab­lish­ment brist­ling — was most re­cently evid­ent in the gov­ern­ment shut­down. But its im­print is vis­ible in the bur­geon­ing field of Sen­ate and House com­pet­i­tions, too. Al­most a dozen Re­pub­lic­an House mem­bers, such as long­time Idaho Re­pub­lic­an Mike Simpson, are fa­cing primar­ies from the right, with more chal­lenges ex­pec­ted be­fore the cycle be­gins next year. “This is a key mo­ment for the tea party to de­cide how best to use its re­sources and wheth­er to really go in be­hind can­did­ates who need sup­port [against Demo­crats], as op­posed to wast­ing re­sources against can­did­ates who have mar­gin­al dif­fer­ence from people who might chal­lenge them” from the right, Dome­nech says.

But the High­lander the­ory could have the greatest im­pact on the Sen­ate. Already, six Re­pub­lic­an in­cum­bents — Minor­ity Lead­er Mitch Mc­Con­nell and Sens. Lind­sey Gra­ham, Thad Co­chran, Mi­chael En­zi, Pat Roberts, and Lamar Al­ex­an­der — face primary chal­lenges from the right. Most of those seats aren’t at risk of a Demo­crat­ic takeover, but the in­terne­cine battles there could dis­tract at­ten­tion from the task of win­ning a Sen­ate ma­jor­ity. The real ques­tion, Wilson says, is “how much money are you will­ing to spend to knock off these guys, and how many dol­lars does [the in­tern­al fight] take from [the fight against] Landrieu, Pry­or, and Be­gich? Those guys are get­ting a free ride be­cause we’re more will­ing to chase pur­ity and keep 40 votes then we’re will­ing to go out and get Demo­crats that are weak.” And there have been rum­blings about chal­lenges for oth­er sen­at­ors, such as Texas con­ser­vat­ive John Cornyn, No. 2 in GOP lead­er­ship.

“They have to find a way to uni­fy the two sides and leave some neut­ral ground,” Wilson says. “Pur­ity is a lovely thing in soul, but a ter­rible thing in the real, ugly world of polit­ics that can’t be wished away with ma­gic­al think­ing or uni­corn dust.” There, the only thing that gets wished away is the latest fa­vor­ite.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
4 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
4 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
5 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×