The Establishment Won

The meaning of Iowa.

By
341
Former President Donald Trump invites Sen. Marco Rubio to speak during a rally at the Miami-Dade County Fair and Exposition on November 6, 2022, in Miami, Florida. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

If I had asked you six months ago to sketch a scenario in which Donald Trump loses the Iowa caucuses, what would that scenario have looked like?

I assume it would have gone like this:

The field needs to winnow early. We can’t afford to have the anti-Trump vote splinter this time as it did in 2016.

We also need influential conservatives to get behind his opponents. Convincing Republican voters that they have “permission” to abandon their leader will require real exertion by opinion-makers.

And we need an electability argument. The more polls show that other candidates in the field stand a better chance of beating Joe Biden, the stronger the case for a new nominee becomes.

My editor pointed out to me this morning that all three of those wishes came true before Monday night’s Iowa caucuses.

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
341
By
Comments (341)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Mathias

    If I might venture to point out a small discrepancy, the remainder of Charlie Cooke's quoted article also said that he had been (and would continue to be) pressured to vote for Biden, lest he empower the end of democracy. He rejected that demand as well. He will not, in other words, be joining with the Democrats to defeat Trump's movement.

    If the Republican party is in as dire a state as you say, then it makes no sense to support and prop up a Democratic party which is in a state that is equally dire (though it is not the same state; its sicknesses are different, but no less fatal). If 'burn it all down' is our motto, then saving one side of the idolatrous statue while turning the other to ash doesn't seem possible or reasonable as an expectation. If 'walk away from it all' is our motto, then changing rooms to a different wing of the hotel is not the same thing as checking out. If our motto is 'the Democrats aren't as bad as Trump, so if you squint just right you can overlook your differences with them and support their initiatives with a clean conscience'... well, that may be your motto. It isn't Charlie's, and it isn't mine.

    I will, however, make a caveat. If the Republican party can change as much as it has, then so can the Democratic party. If it can be changed for the worse (as it has), then it could potentially be changed for the better. That means that if the Democrats got new leadership and altered their priorities and rejected their former wicked positions, there would be no obstacle to voting Democrat except for an aversion to the letter D over R, which has long since ceased to be a barrier to me. In other words, if they nominated John Fetterman for president, I would almost certainly vote Democrat.

    But to vote for Biden and (sooner or later) Harris for president? Why would we do that when we don't think they're fit for the office? They haven't changed; only their opposition has changed. Putting black next to charcoal grey does not make the grey into shining white. So I'll stick to ye olde Never Trump slogan from 2016: "It's not a binary choice!"

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Mandy B.

      I'm sorry but I disagree, and so did Lincoln, and so did Reagan.

      Collapse
      1. Mathias

        I'm afraid I'm not fully understanding your point: you disagree in what way? You believe that supporting the current Democratic ticket is the right thing to do? Or you believe it is a binary choice? Or you wouldn't support Fetterman for Prez? I made a few assertions over the course of my admittedly verbose comment. With which of them do you disagree?

        Collapse
  2. Erik Borncamp

    Thank you. Excellent read very good points well stated. Couldn’t agree, more . It’s the voters not the party. …


    So, what do we do about it?


    Maybe this is where leadership comes in.? The ability of a great leader, to lead these voters to something better. If only we had one.

    Collapse
    1. Iconoclast

      How about joining the Democratic Party and pulling its center of gravity to the right? I have a lot more in common with my traditional Republican friends than the Progressive wing of my party. We Democrats need more critical mass in the center. Former Republicans could provide it.

      Collapse
    2. Brandon Hartley

      You're absolutely right, but this solution runs up against the problem of the voters. I think we have pretty fine leaders (Hutchinson, Scott, etc...). But that's not what the voters want. It's like offering up a delicious and healthy four course meal and having the customers scream at you for not serving them corn dogs and ice cream.

      Collapse
      1. BPhillips

        Scott recently endorsed Trump - I'd cross him off that list.

        Collapse
        1. Brandon Hartley

          Uugh, I know, right. "Politicians will always disappoint you" has never sounded so wise.

          Collapse
  3. Brandon Hartley

    I just don't understand the desire to vote third party. I'm a Reagan Republican and feel as disaffected as all of you. I think Biden has been atrocious and will lay at his feet inflation and the entire Ukraine war (I think the pullout from Afghanistan may have essentially caused it). But Trump is an even greater threat. So do I oppose that threat by sulking with No Labels, or do I make my vote count doubly by voting for Biden? The choice seems clear to me. If I avoid the hard decision and Trump is elected, and he irreparably damages the republic, could I justify sitting on the fence? I think not.

    Collapse
  4. Wes.Bridges

    So—We the People do not inspire confidence these days. WFB once famously expressed a preference for being governed by the first 2000 names in the Boston phone book—remember those?—rather than the faculty of Harvard University. I daresay his opinion of Harvard would remain the same, but his confidence in We the People…would not.

    Collapse
  5. GeezingGuy

    As I read commenters saying that they WILL not vote for Trump and CANnot vote for Biden, I wonder what is their North Star (joining Val Xavier in going 'Star Trek' on you--their 'Prime Directive') is in this election--not condescendingly at all--but I wonder. It seems to me that one such North Star COULD be, "The history of this American Experiment clearly shows that eventually, a majority of Americans believe character does matter." Defeating Trump, and what he represents, could potentially outweigh all other considerations, because other politicians (and many future politicians) are watching. Given the current political environment and inevitability of Trump v Biden in November, if a meaningful number of Republicans cross party lines to give Biden a clear electoral victory, there is a lesson in there. (Even if the Stolen Election Bus
    makes another national tour.) Even if we suffer through four more years of Democratic rule, or a couple of years of President Harris, is it possible to squint at the future and know our children and grandchildren will be better off because the angry, populist Norms-Do-Not-Apply-To-Me road was shown to be a temporary cul de sac of defeat?

    I know it won't happen, but this is supposed to be the place where Normies come to ponder (and to dream), right? Thanks for reading....

    Collapse
    1. Jfan

      Actually this expresses my view better than I have in my own posts.

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Mandy B.

    I left the GOP just after Jan. 6. Done, dusted, and don't darken my hallway again.

    Collapse
  7. AD Tippet

    A partner in The Dispatch enterprise conducts a podcast called the Remnant. Here is Nock, the creator of the term on what Nick is saying:

    "The line of differentiation between the masses and the Remnant is set invariably by quality, not by circumstance. The Remnant are those who by force of intellect are able to apprehend these principles, and by force of character are able, at least measurably, to cleave to them. The masses are those who are unable to do either."

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Mandy B.

    "Not only did the frontrunner clear a majority, he piled up the biggest margin of victory in the history of the caucuses."
    AND: He's going to lose, because this deeply conservative, highly patriotic, robust defender of freedom and law and order will now walk on broken glass to vote for Biden AS THE AWFUL BETTER OPTION.

    This is what the Party Formerly Known as the GOP has done to us. This is the torture it has chosen to put us to. But I will not break under it: Trump Delenda Est.

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Rdpulfer

    I do have one other point. I disagree that Hilary is the only candidate Trump is capable of defeating. There is one candidate Trump is more than capable of defeating...himself, and nine months is more than enough time to display that fact.

    Lest you think I'm too much of an optimist, though, I think the same can be said of Biden, albeit with slightly lower odds.

    Collapse
  10. Nikitas Hatzimihail

    I had never seen this Rubio video. Having watched, I feel sadness and hate. Hate for Trump, of course. Hate for those who support him. Hate for Chris Christie, whose support was vital to Trump in ‘16 and who took out Rubio. And hate for Marco Rubio: the video shows how much promise he had and how much he sold everything worthwhile out.

    Unless we say effective repentance, may each and all rot in Hell

    Collapse
Load More