The Corner

The Establishment Primary

I think David French got it exactly right yesterday. If fortyish days out of Iowa, this is now a Romney-Gingrich primary — if Gingrich is the “anti-Mitt” — then it means we’re through talking about “establishment” versus “outsider” credentials. Both Romney and Gingrich are down-the-middle establishment conservatives. They both have friends in Washington. They both have committed the crime of making a dollar and a cent while wearing a suit and tie. Neither is a stranger to cutting a deal. They even have the same baggage. As Kate notes, Gingrich like Romney once supported a state-level individual mandate, and now cuts a number of distinctions, either vague or subtle, between the federal and state levels, between what he did then and what he’d do now, and so on.

Romney and Gingrich’s twin standing atop the polls indicates a large plurality, or even majority, of the Republican electorate realizes there tends to be, for good and for ill, a coincidence between insider-dom and presidentiality. Some commentators seem to think Gingrich is just the last guy to find a chair when the music stopped. But I don’t think that’s right. It’s worth recalling that after some (big) early stumbles, Newt’s campaign has been solid. His message has been consistent, and he’s earned near universal praise at every debate. It’s not like he just showed up. So “peaking at the right time” just doesn’t explain his rise. I think it’s something less random, more ordered than that. The primary has thus far exhibited a kind of telos (neatly illustrated in charts like this), in which the conservative base has shopped for an “outsider” candidate — fronting goodwill first to Bachmann, then to Perry, then to Cain, as if it were a line of credit — while moving, begrudgingly but inevitably, toward the insiders as each of the above proved unsatisfactory. I think I read somewhere the metaphor that Bachmann/Perry/Cain were the ones you dated and Romney the one you’d end up marrying. As weird and reductive as that is, it’s not exactly wrong either.

To extend the creepy metaphor — and assuming my premise is correct — what we now have is a kind of establishment love triangle. Will the base choose the sharp-looking executive with the impeccable personal morality or the frumpy, but charismatic, philosopher with the checkered past? Time will tell.

UPDATE: Several commenters have brought up a distinction between a “Washington insider” and an “establishment candidate.” Newt, they argue, is the former but not the latter, and Mitt the latter but not the former. The idea is that “establishment candidate” just means the candidate with the backing of the political elites. I think as a matter of semantics (and I take semantics seriously) this is a distinction worth making, but I’m not sure it makes a difference in this case — both Newt and Mitt have reservoirs of support and favors owed within the GOP establishment. If Romney has the preponderance, it’s only because he’s been running for president for six years straight. But then again, if Mitt has the preponderance, it isn’t a particularly loud preponderance, is it? Many GOP players seem to be taking a wait-and-see approach.

Daniel Foster — Daniel Foster is a former news editor of National Review Online.

Most Popular


Cold Brew’s Insidious Hegemony

Soon, many parts of the United States will be unbearably hot. Texans and Arizonans will be able to bake cookies on their car dashboards; the garbage on the streets of New York will be especially pungent; Washington will not only figuratively be a swamp. And all across America, coffee consumers will turn their ... Read More
National Security & Defense

The Warmonger Canard

Whatever the opposite of a rush to war is — a crawl to peace, maybe — America is in the middle of one. Since May 5, when John Bolton announced the accelerated deployment of the Abraham Lincoln carrier group to the Persian Gulf in response to intelligence of a possible Iranian attack, the press has been aflame ... Read More

Australia’s Voters Reject Leftist Ideas

Hell hath no fury greater than left-wingers who lose an election in a surprise upset. Think Brexit in 2016. Think Trump’s victory the same year. Now add Australia. Conservative prime minister Scott Morrison shocked pollsters and pundits alike with his victory on Saturday, and the reaction has been brutal ... Read More
NR Webathon

We’ve Had Bill Barr’s Back

One of the more dismaying features of the national political debate lately is how casually and cynically Attorney General Bill Barr has been smeared. He is routinely compared to Roy Cohn on a cable-TV program that prides itself on assembling the most thoughtful and plugged-in political analysts and ... Read More