National
Review Online
Monday,
November 14, 2022
Election defeats
naturally create circular firing squads, but the last few days have seen a more
directed effort to put Minority Leader Mitch McConnell against a wall and shoot
him at dawn.
The MAGA
forces in the party, eager to deflect blame from Donald Trump for the failure
to take the Senate, are pointing fingers at McConnell. Trump himself wrote on
his Truth Social network, “It’s Mitch McConnell’s fault.” Meanwhile, there is
agitation in the caucus to delay this week’s scheduled leadership vote in the
hopes that some viable alternative to McConnell will emerge.
There
are legitimate criticisms of McConnell, who retains the support of the lion’s
share of his caucus, but most of the case against him is malicious and
ill-conceived.
His
critics complain about his spending choices in the election. The context here
is a historic fundraising effort that, all told, poured roughly $360 million
into the midterms. Even at that level of spending, choices have to be made. The
main McConnell group, the Senate Leadership Fund (SLF), didn’t pony up for
Blake Masters in Arizona and pulled out of New Hampshire, where it looked,
briefly, as if Don Bolduc had a chance against Democrat incumbent Maggie Hassan.
These
decisions are certainly defensible. The polling that had Bolduc close was
wrong, and the SLF was correct to believe its own numbers that showed him
further behind. He ended up losing by 9 points. If nearly $60 million of
spending in Pennsylvania by the SLF and associated groups didn’t get Mehmet Oz
over the top, no amount of resources was rescuing Bolduc — who was more
associated with “stop the steal” and ran a lackluster campaign.
Masters
was also a flawed candidate and is projected to lose. SLF tried to forge a deal
with Masters sponsor Peter Thiel to spend on his campaign in the general
election, but it fell through. Regardless, Thiel easily could have written a
$15 million check for pro-Masters ads, and Trump could have lent him his email
list or cut a check. And if Masters had truly been an inspiring figure, he
could have raised more money on his own. None of those things happened, but
Masters, eager to tell a MAGA audience what it wants to hear, blames only
McConnell. It remains unlikely that Masters, who at this writing trails by five
points, would have won with better funding for the same campaign.
The SLF
and its allies had no compunction funding Trumpy candidates that they believed
could win. Exhibit A is populist J. D. Vance, who was showered with $30 million
to help get him over the top in Ohio. Indeed, the SLF did more to spend on MAGA
candidates than Trump did. The former president is a prodigious fundraiser but
spent a pittance on his own candidates and used Potemkin fundraising appeals to
gull his supporters into thinking they were giving to, say, Blake Masters when
most of the donations went to Trump’s operation. Yet the same people currently
angry at McConnell have little to say about Trump’s failure to put his own
money where his mouth was.
Another
count against McConnell is that he spent $6 million on moderate Lisa Murkowski
in Alaska, who is trying to fend off a challenge from another, more
conservative Republican. We aren’t fans of Murkowski and would have preferred
it if that money were spent elsewhere, but it is longstanding practice for
congressional leadership to support its incumbents, and the $6 million wasn’t
much money in the scheme of things.
Still
another knock against McConnell is that he said after the primary season that
candidate quality matters. This was a true statement, but it was a lapse into
punditry and an implied criticism of the party’s choices at the outset of a
campaign. It didn’t mention any candidate by name and made no difference in the
outcome of the election, but this is a case where the famously discreet
McConnell should have exercised a little more discretion.
Finally,
McConnell vigorously opposed coming up with a party agenda prior to the
election. This was indeed a mistake. It would have helped the GOP case against
Biden on inflation, for instance, if it had consensus anti-inflationary items
it could have promised to pass in the majority. (Rick Scott, unfortunately,
tried to fill the agenda vacuum with a poorly thought out and inadequately
vetted list of policies that provided easy targets for Biden and the
Democrats.)
All this
said, even by the harshest reasonable evaluation, McConnell’s midterm performance
isn’t in the same universe as Donald Trump’s. The former president
chose poor candidates based on their fealty to him and his fevered
and destructive 2020 delusions, spent hardly anything, made himself the
center of attention to the extent he could, and conducted himself with his
characteristic selfishness and lack of judgment. For him to turn around and
blame McConnell requires chutzpah even by his shameless standards.
There
are also criticisms of how McConnell has handled his Senate responsibilities.
There is no doubt that he wasn’t always as tactically sure-footed as usual in
the battles about Biden’s spending over the last year, but he was very
concerned about keeping Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema from potentially joining
any move against the Senate filibuster. Democrats did not get the colossal
spending that Joe Biden proposed, but they did end up getting some significant
elements of his agenda passed. Still, McConnell is clearly the canniest
Republican Senate leader in memory — tough-minded and pragmatic and almost
always able to hold his troops together.
He isn’t
a charismatic or inspirational figure, but that’s not his job. Anyone looking
for those qualities in someone in his position knows nothing about the Senate,
whose institutional culture always shapes its leaders. Senate leaders need to
deeply understand the rules and nature of their institution and command support
across their caucuses. There’s a reason that they are never bomb-throwers or
merely representatives of factions.
Mitch
McConnell, who won’t be the Senate leader forever, isn’t flawless. But
Republicans could do worse, and if they were somehow to dump him in a stupid
and chaotic coup, would.
No comments:
Post a Comment