Midterm Mayhem for the Free and Virtuous Society

T here has been some pretty unsurprising but bad analysis of the election results since Tuesday night. There also has been some very good analysis, from National Review’s editors, from our own Jim Geraghty, from our own Dan McLaughlin, from Yuval Levin, from Erick Erickson, and plenty of others on the conservative right. There is no need for a redundant analysis that merely restates what has already been said, even though an amen to all of what they said should be assumed. What I want to suggest, in total alignment with my aforementioned friends and colleagues, is that these election results capture the very essence of the twin deficits in the Trump-era moment: a newfound contempt for both the free and the virtuous society.

The debate over the Iran war’s role in this Republican debacle would be comical if it were not so maddening. With virtually no one operating in good faith or making a serious argument, a whole cabal of people have claimed, all statistical evidence and voter polling to the contrary, that the sole reason for states like Texas, Kansas, and Mississippi flipping is the Iran war. Inversely, no one who disputes that monocausal theory of the case denies that the Iran war is unpopular, and that its unpopularity was a contributor to the decline of approval for President Trump and to the results Republicans suffered all over the country Tuesday night. That voters detest the state of prices, and that they believe (with obvious basis in fact) that tariffs are connected to this, is not disputable by credible people. That the bizarre handling of the Iran war led to a Strait of Hormuz debacle, and to significant problems for fuel prices and a downstream impact from diesel prices, is also obvious. Reasonable people can disagree as to how much of the Iran war contribution was related to opposition to de-nuclearizing Iran versus the way in which it all went (e.g., a failed MOU negotiated by the vice president, repeated claims of victory that were obviously untrue, and a sustained period of time with no clear resolution). But all advocates of a multi-causal explanation of the midterms recognize the significant role Iran played.

While those who predicted the economic pressures tariffs would create (yours truly included) and others who are more focused on Iran (some due to strong anti-Israel obsessions) socially post to their heart’s content about those two issues, it seems to me that the framework of Burkean conservatism is under assault in this new right, populist, Trumpian, Vanceguard moment, and the election results reflect this internal right-wing implosion. My contention is that a lack of focus on the free and virtuous society cost the GOP dearly in 2026 and will cost the GOP dearly until that framework is recovered.

Advocates of a free society have never called for central planning as a tool for economic growth.  The anti-constitutional, discretionary, imperialistic, arbitrary wielding of tariffs has been a sight to behold, but not nearly as much of a sight as watching people try to defend it.  From “Canada is ripping us off” claims to “this will restore manufacturing jobs” to “we must protect our national security interests” to “tariffs are making us rich” — the statist dogma embedded in all of this was trumped only by the intellectual incoherence. Tariffs have been put on, then taken off, and applied so randomly and inconsistently, it has caused the few honest pro-tariff people out there to admit this has been an unmitigated disaster even for so-called economic nationalists.

But the heavy hand of counterproductive and imperialistic tariffs has hardly been the only policy priority undermining a free society. The first two years of this Trump administration created 40 times the quantity of something President Obama did just one time — the taking of an ownership interest in a private U.S. company. If you had told me that in 2026 the United States government would have 41 companies on its balance sheet, I would have told you that neither the Republicans nor Democrats won in 2024, but rather that the CCP did. Generational critique of state-owned enterprises has been muted in exchange for indefensible government equity positions, making a mockery of cogent defense for optimal capital allocation and repudiation of cronyism.

Add to the mix an economic agenda that has pushed deficits to record levels (unashamedly), suggested paying married women taxpayer money for being home with their kids, promoted the idea of blocking private ownership of private property, advocated for price controls in credit cards, and made demands of private businesses repeatedly around their own priorities of investment and resource allocation, and what we have seen is a rhetorical opposition to the DSA movement of the left that is accompanied by DSA-light policies on the right. This is political malpractice, in that it has never worked in history to offer a weak and limp echo to the worst policies of progressivism, but it is also an ideological heresy for conservatives. Those who say voters were only motivated by prices in this election are wrong and miss the point that some of the administration’s policies heavily exacerbated high prices, but they also underestimate the role that a potent opposition to left-wing policies represents. The strongest talking point the GOP had this election was that the Democrats seem to be increasingly radicalized. They spent two years taking that opposition off the table by an unending game of footsie with these populist embraces of government interventions in the economy.

A disdain for the second half of our conservative mantra is even more evident in the last two years. Voters time and time again cited “corruption” as a dominant factor in their voting. Attempts to bribe voters with $5,000 we do not have to give them is an economic perversion, but it was first a moral perversion — and the right used to know that (“how dare President Biden run on student loan forgiveness,” we used to say). But the $5,000 atrocity pales in comparison to the grift and debauchery we have seen in the president’s family crypto adventures, the use of pardons with financial conflicts, and the nonstop obsession with vanity projects and other misguided priorities of public funds. These things do undermine the virtuous society, and they were relevant to voters — perhaps as relevant as any other issue.

But not all undermining of public virtue speaks to economic interests and crony self-dealing. Sometimes virtue is as simple as basic character and morality. No exit poll asked about the president’s tweet celebrating the gruesome murder of Rob Reiner and his wife at the hands of their own deranged son, but any movement that can’t condemn that is a movement that has lost moral authority in the quest for a virtuous society.

I have plenty of opinions about the diminishment of competence in this administration relative to the first term. I share the same disdain for this administration’s use of lawfare and other abusive power moves that so many others have. I do not believe those things should be ignored. Nor do I believe the inexplicable ability to take a 70-30 issue like the president’s admirable priority to control the border and turn it into a 30-70 issue through incompetent and misguided implementation, excess, and technique should be ignored. Personnel is policy, and that has been a massive net negative the two years (I would not say that about the first term). Lawfare rationalized as “you did it to me” does not become okay. And the immigration issue should have been one that held the American people’s support. Yet I am happy to relegate all of these matters to second-tier concerns in the midterm results.

Fundamentally, conservatives seek to promote a free and virtuous society. The policy portfolio of the administration and the personal character and behavior of the movement’s major evangelists have undermined both. On these two fronts, the throttling the GOP took was neither a surprise nor something to bemoan. What should be bemoaned is if those in denial about the state of affairs, and those with their own self-serving agendas, win the day. The Burkean right — classical conservatives who believe in a Reaganite vision for American society — must use the moment to stand up and never succumb to the temptation the last ten years have produced. The new right’s opposition to a free society and a virtuous one has been on full display for ten years.  On Tuesday night, we got a chance to see how it plays electorally, as well.