Conservatives vs. Trump

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. and WASHINGTON, D.C.—In a presidential election year, a leading GOP candidate can expect to see his most ardent backers at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), an annual gathering that draws the biggest names in Republican politics. But when CPAC 2016 commenced in National Harbor, Md., in early March, only a smattering of Donald Trump supporters showed up—and their candidate was nowhere to be seen.

“I think somebody told him [Fox News anchor] Megyn Kelly was going to be here—or even worse, he was told that conservatives were going to be here,” said U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who spoke shortly after organizers learned Trump was backing out of his scheduled appearance. The standing-room-only crowd greeted Cruz with raucous chants: “Ted! Ted! Ted!”

Trump likely made the right decision. Although he held a large delegate lead when CPAC got underway, the event offered signs more indicative of stubborn defiance than of a party ready to coalesce around him. Some attendees were planning to stage a walkout when Trump took the stage. In the CPAC straw poll, 70 percent chose Cruz or Florida Sen. Marco Rubio as their first choice for president, compared with Trump’s 15 percent.

The mainstream media have portrayed the Republican establishment as Trump’s archnemesis, but CPAC illustrated a little-recognized truth: Non-establishment conservatives are providing the most vocal resistance to the bombastic businessman. Despite rhetoric distancing themselves from Trump’s outlandish remarks, party elites are showing an increasing willingness to accept Trump as the GOP standard-bearer—largely because many are not convinced he is an existential threat to the Republican Party.

Other conservatives, however, have seen enough.

“I think if we got into a position where it was him or Hillary Clinton, it’s going to be a really tough choice,” said CPAC attendee Jay Richards, a Christian author and professor who said he wants to see the party do more to deal with Trump. “We have one candidate giving a full-throated defense of abortion and another giving a full-throated defense of bombing civilians. This is about as bad as it gets.”

Less than 10 miles away from where CPAC took place, a different story unfolded four days earlier on Capitol Hill. As Republican senators arrived for a weekly conference lunch, one member after another ducked past reporters blurting out questions about the presidential contest.

“I don’t talk about the presidential race,” said Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “Maverick” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the party’s 2008 presidential nominee, also took a pass, even though he’s been on the receiving end of Trump’s insults.

“I’ve tried to be pretty consistent about not expressing my opinion about the presidential race,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. When pressed, McConnell admitted he would support the Republican nominee. Then he abruptly walked away.

Others answered likewise: “I’m going to support whoever the nominee is,” Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., said curtly, days before his state went to the polls. Freshman Sens. David Perdue, R-Ga., and Bill Cassidy, R-La., told me the same.

“Someone may not agree with him, but he might be our nominee, and our nominee’s going to be better than their nominee—by far,” Cassidy said.

While only one Republican senator—Alabama’s Jeff Sessions, a crusader against mass immigration—has formally endorsed Trump, only two Republicans have consistently spoken out against him: South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham, who briefly ran against Trump last year, and freshman Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, who released an open letter saying a hypothetical Trump/Clinton matchup would require conservatives to find a third option.

There is no single reason for the silence, but lawmakers’ own political realities help explain it: McConnell, Wicker, Perdue, Burr, and Cassidy all represent states Trump has won. No matter how conservative or new to Congress they may be, Trump followers consider them part of the establishment. Although GOP senators in blue states may oppose Trump while running for reelection in the fall, others fear denouncing him may only inflame the electorate and help elect Clinton.

The story is similar in the U.S. House, where many members plan to unite behind Trump if he gains the GOP nomination for president. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., chair of the House Select Panel on Infant Lives, said she is “absolutely” comfortable with Trump as the nominee, but education would be important: “I look forward to having the opportunity to explain to him how community health centers are doing the heavy lift when it comes to doing women’s healthcare. It’s not Planned Parenthood.” (Trump has praised Planned Parenthood.)

Only a handful of sitting lawmakers have come out against Trump, and few want to talk about him. Several typically accessible members declined my interview requests.

Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., did go on the record and called Trump the “ultimate insider.” Franks, originally a Mike Huckabee supporter, has shifted his support to Cruz as the best hope to stop the businessman.

“The true conservatives see that Donald Trump is anything but a conservative,” said Franks, whose voting record ranks among the most conservative in Congress. “He’s closing in on 70 years old, and if he’s just now forming his political ideals, that should be concerning.”

Primary results show a majority of Republicans do not support Trump, who attracted less than 35 percent of the cumulative vote through the first 24 contests. But sustained attempts by other candidates to expose the mogul’s record didn’t begin until late February, and opposition remained fractured past the halfway mark of the primary calendar.

Behind closed doors, some Republicans sound Machiavellian—simply glad to see results they’ve long coveted: Donations are up, poll numbers look good, and Democrats are crossing over in droves to vote in GOP primaries. Trump’s strong support among white, non-college-educated voters may put in play states that have become Democratic strongholds, including Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

Perhaps most significant to the party, the anti-establishment furor at the presidential level has shown no signs of down-ballot consequences: No incumbent member of Congress has lost a primary this cycle, despite several House and Senate challenges in states Trump carried.

Party insiders acknowledge the convergence of the presidential and congressional races is not likely to happen until after the party conventions in July—the point of no return. If things go wrong, they believe they can distance themselves from Trump to limit potential damage.

That’s a big risk: Senate Republicans hold an eight-seat majority but will defend members in 24 of 34 races in November.

Capitol Hill Republicans still retain hope that Trump could moderate his message, start acting more presidential, and possibly name, for example, a respected senator as his running mate. But a wide range of conservative leaders and activists aren’t interested in finding out. Many have vowed not to vote for Trump in the general election, ranging from radio hosts Glenn Beck, Erick Erickson, and Steve Deace to former Republican Reps. Ron Paul and J.C. Watts.

Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, has led the evangelical voices against Trump, and in late February pastor and best-selling author Max Lucado joined him. Lucado, who is usually politically silent, embarked on a media tour against Trump, saying he failed the “decency test.”

Robert P. George and George Weigel, two leading Catholic thinkers, issued a March plea to all Catholics, declaring Trump “manifestly unfit to be president.” Thirty-five other leading Catholics signed on to the open letter.

The #NeverTrump hashtag has come to embody the opposition. Erick Erickson called for conservatives to pledge never to vote for Trump and said he gets daily feedback from people who are making that pledge.

“Asking any Christian to support a liberal who supports Planned Parenthood and socialist healthcare or Hillary Clinton is a bridge too far for me,” Erickson wrote in an email. “If Trump voters wish to proceed, they are doing so with full knowledge that many people will oppose him.” Many Trump backers have labeled Erickson an establishment Republican and viciously attacked him on social media.

“Right now we’re in an environment where logic, reason, and clear thinking are being labeled as establishment and rejected,” Rep. Trent Franks told me. “I certainly hope that this party wakes up while there is time. … If we forsake the principles that caused us to be born, we will go the way of the Whigs.”

Endorsements primary

As a rule, endorsements of presidential candidates by sitting lawmakers serve as an indicator of who will win a party’s nomination. This year’s GOP race has, so far, been an exception to the rule. Sen. Marco Rubio ran behind Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz and dropped out of the race on March 15 but had the most endorsements of any GOP candidate: 14 senators, 48 congressmen, and five governors. A huge number of lawmakers have remained on the sidelines: Since 1980, Ronald Reagan is the only Republican nominee who had fewer endorsements at this stage than Rubio—and none has secured the nomination with as few endorsements as Trump or Cruz. —J.C.D.

Listen to J.C. Derrick discuss this article on The World and Everything in It.