The pitfalls of political outsiders

WASHINGTON—During last week’s Republican presidential debate, Salem Radio host Hugh Hewitt asked Donald Trump to define his priorities among the U.S. nuclear triad. Most Americans probably had never heard of the term, and based on his answer it seemed Trump hadn’t either.

“I think we need somebody, absolutely, that we can trust, who is totally responsible, who really knows what he or she is doing. That is so powerful and so important,” Trump said in a meandering answer that included his opposition to the Iraq War. “Nuclear changes the whole ballgame.”

Hewitt pressed Trump on the issue, asking him which of the three legs of the nuclear triad was his priority. Trump’s response: “To me, nuclear is, the power, the devastation, is just very important to me.”

Hewitt tossed the topic to Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., who explained the term before responding to the question: “The triad is the ability of the United States to conduct nuclear attacks using airplanes, using missiles launched from silos from the ground, and from our nuclear subs.”

Trump and to a lesser extent Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina have gained traction precisely because they are political outsiders, but last week’s debate exchange highlighted the potential pitfalls of electing a person who has never held a government office. On Sunday, fellow GOP candidate Jeb Bush called Trump’s triad response “mind blowing” evidence that he is not a serious candidate, while the billionaire’s handlers dismissed his performance as evidence that “he’ll never be a politician.”

Is it possible for non-politicians to be effective in Washington? Many legislators have proven it is, but two lawmakers elected without previous political experience told WORLD it’s not always easy to tell the difference between those who are prepared and those who aren’t—even for the candidates themselves.

“One of my greatest fears was not losing the election but winning and then not being effective at the task,” said Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., a seminary graduate who won a House seat in 2010 after 22 years in youth ministry.

Lankford researched the issues he would have to know, using news stories, reports from think tanks, the Government Accountability Office, and the Congressional Research Service as sources.

“It’s easier to do the politics than it is to do be effective in policy." Lankford told me. “If you’re going to be effective in actually getting something done, you’ve got to know the policy.”

Lankford’s effort paid off with positive reviews from his peers and unanimous election as the Republican Policy Committee chairman—the No. 5 leadership position in the House—only two years after he took office. But Lankford said those early days were tough: “You’re walking into a world where everyone seems to know the lingo.”

In last week’s debate, Carson first brought up America’s aging nuclear fleet, illustrating some level of proficiency on the nuclear triad, but the retired neurosurgeon has had his share of problems grasping policy. Carson has struggled through numerous foreign policy interviews, called the terror group Hamas something that sounded more like “hummus” at a Republican Jewish Coalition event, and failed to absorb key information, according to an adviser.

Rep. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., a plumber and rancher by trade who took office in 2013, told me the best way to understand complex policy is to “surround yourself with people who know it.” He separated key issues into a first page of “headliner” issues he had to know immediately and a second page of issues he studied for two or more hours per night.

“When you get up here, there’s a huge learning curve,” Mullin, 38, said. “The way it works in the real world isn’t the way it works up here.”

Karlyn Bowman, a public-opinion expert at the American Enterprise Institute, said Trump’s missteps are unlikely to hurt him at this early stage because most voters simply want to know if they can relate to the candidate. Likeability is more relevant than policy at this point.

“He’s projecting strength,” Bowman said. “People who are supporting him are supporting him on a different level.”

Mullin, who has endorsed Rubio, declined to knock Trump for appearing to not understanding the nuclear triad. He said the two most important factors he’s looking for are consistency and an ability to unite.

Lankford, who has not endorsed a candidate, also recognized the learning curve but said whoever wins “better be prepared,” adding he’s most interested in the character of the candidates.

“I would rather elect someone based on their personal values, their worldview—how they handle difficult issues—because you’re going to have to trust them,” Lankford said. “Whoever is the next president, you don’t know what issues they’re going to face, but you can look at their own personal life and moral values and say: ‘Can I trust them?’”