In the latest journalistic reiteration of Republicans Created the Trump Monster, New York Times political analyst John Harwood struggles like every other liberal reporter who wants to warn the conservatives are going to destroy the Republicans.
Doesn’t it seem discordant to say the conservatives are going to be disastrous, even as you note the Tea Party energy has led to GOP takeovers of the House and Senate? Instead, Harwood just lectures that the Republican leaders need to work on “anger management” – which is a cute term which implies “forcing moderation, both rhetorical and ideological.”
Republican political leaders themselves bear some responsibility for Mr. Trump’s ascent. In dealing with the dyspeptic constituency that has empowered them, they’ve repeatedly failed at anger management.
Throughout Barack Obama’s presidency, the Republican Party has been a hothouse of grievance: against his health care law, his immigration policy, even his citizenship. The ire of conservatives helped Republican candidates wrest control from the Democrats of the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2014.
But the inability of party leaders to control that intensity has often backfired. In primary campaigns, it has toppled effective Republican lawmakers.
On Capitol Hill, it left the House speaker, John A. Boehner, and the top Republican in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, powerless to avert a debt crisis and government shutdown that damaged their party’s reputation. In part, that’s because so many top Republicans have been unwilling to risk angering voters and rank-and-file lawmakers by distinguishing legitimate grievances from contrived ones, lost causes from achievable goals.
Harwood never defines what are the contrived grievances, and what are the lost causes? Obviously, with a Democratic president, a lot of conservative goals are going to be frustrated or vetoed. But why would voters want an opposition party that doesn't really oppose? How many bills has Obama been forced to veto? That doesn't look like Boehner and McConnell have been "unwilling to risk angering" conservatives.
Again, Harwood suggests a government shutdown (of sorts) in 2013 "damaged their party's reputation." Liberal reporters cling to that even as they admit the Republicans took the Senate in 2014. What they might mean is "will inevitably damage their chances in the next election." Reporters often channel their wishful thinking as the conventional wisdom. Harwood demonstrated it well in this piece.
