By Victor Davis Hanson
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
The usual criteria for political success — plenty of New
York and Washington IOUs, youthful vigor, good looks, glibness, access to lots
of money — aren’t sufficient any longer to galvanize the Republican party or
get out the conservative vote. Instead, the next Republican nominee should meet
four criteria that are rarely mentioned.
Media Ogre
Being liked by the media is no plus. In the 2008
primaries the media preferred John McCain as a reasonable moderate, at least
compared with the primary alternatives, and in 2012 they preferred Mitt Romney.
Once the primaries were over, both candidates reverted to their prior demonic
status among journalists.
So why not nominate a Republican who never addresses a
celebrity journalist as “Candy,” or
“Katie,” or “Brian,” or “George,” but instead politely says Mr. this or Ms.
that, avoiding any suggestion of either intimacy or paranoid dislike. Distanced
formality is the key with the media.
The candidates’ own desire to appear accommodating to the
press has led mostly to media contempt. For a while in 2008 we were treated to
wild charges that John McCain had had an affair; debate moderator Candy Crowley
interrupted the give-and-take to join sides with Barack Obama. Romney’s sins
were supposedly impolite behavior as a high-schooler and putting a pet in a
cage on his car roof. He also did not say hello often enough to his trash
collector. The next nominee should not just expect to be disliked by the New
York/Washington-nexus press, but must learn to welcome that disdain as honorific
rather than cower before it. Here the key would be to question the premise and
motive of typical gotcha questions rather than to give the sort of logical
answers that will be selectively edited to appear pejorative. By and large,
journalists are more bullies than geniuses. They tend to be toadyish, not
principled and courageous. Playing by their rules and seeking their approval
are suicidal for any conservative candidate.
Combative
Being combative — and liking it — is critical. One can be
combative without being obnoxious. Any Republican who seriously wishes to
balance the budget, close the border and end illegal immigration, reform the
tax code, address government unions, revisit entitlements, and restore
muscularity abroad must be prepared to be hated. Millions of Americans are
invested in the present tax-and-spend government, in big deficits and huge
debt, in open borders, and in paying no federal income taxes. They will not
quietly concede such advantages, but will smear and slander any who seek to
reform the system and, by extension, the unsustainable policies that
nonetheless are popular with millions. The preferred candidate will have to put
up with shouting union protesters, be amused by op-eds alleging callous
cruelty, and expect violent disruptions when he speaks — as proof of his steady
success. Wanting to be liked is a prescription for disaster. Every time an
accommodating Republican candidate tries to reach out, his generosity is seen
as weakness to be taken advantage of, not magnanimity to be reciprocated.
Experience Running Things
It is an old canard that governors make better presidents
than senators. Instances of former governors who were successful as presidents
and others who were utter failures are both easy to adduce. Still, there is
something to be said for having managed something — something other than a
government staff or bureau — and for not being either a lawyer or a senator.
Neither of those latter jobs offers much experience in balancing a budget,
hiring good people and firing bad, making a profit, and building things, as
opposed to critiquing or nuancing them. So, this time around, we might look for
three additional diverse criteria in a candidate: no Ivy League degree, no
tenure as a U.S. senator, and no law degree. Ivy League lawyers and Washington
insiders like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry know little about
foreign policy, less about the economy — and nothing about the law.
A Man or Woman of the People
In 2008 the elitist Barack Obama turned John McCain into
an old fuddy-duddy who could not remember how many houses his billionaire wife
had purchased — unfair but effective. In 2012 we heard ad nauseam not about
Obama’s elite tastes, his pompous golfing, or his obsession with entertainers,
professional jocks, and other celebrities, but only about Mitt Romney’s cars,
his elevators, and his wife’s purebred mounts. Of course, that was demagoguery,
given that the backbone of the present Left is blue 1-percenter counties and
billionaire megadonors. Nonetheless, nominating someone who did not marry into
a fortune or make hundreds of millions on Wall Street might offer a pleasant
change. Let Hillary suffer the wages of political dynasty, cashing in, and a
multimillion-dollar Clinton stock portfolio. Even scenes of George W. Bush in
2004 cutting brush on his ranch trumped John Kerry windsurfing in spandex.
Cannot the Republicans — who now represent the middle classes much more than
the 1 percent — find a candidate from modest circumstances who cannot be
smeared as a product of privilege when he demands collective sacrifice,
balanced budgets, and entitlement reform? To beat Hillary, one must be the
un-Hillary.
* * *
Where do these quirky requirements leave us? Right now,
with someone more like Scott Walker than Jeb Bush. And I’ll leave it at that
until we see more action in the arena in the months ahead.
No comments:
Post a Comment