Magazine | March 14, 2016, Issue

A Very Big Tent

The Four Faces of the Republican Party: The Fight for the 2016 Presidential Nomination, by Henry Olsen and Dante J. Scala (Palgrave Macmillan, 160 pp., $67.50)

Back in 1980, Republican John Connally was a favorite to win the GOP presidential nomination. The former governor of Texas, a Democrat who had switched parties to serve under President Nixon, Connally raised an enormous sum of money at the outset of the campaign. The press lavished him with publicity. Conventional wisdom assumed that Connally would beat Ronald Reagan easily. But conventional wisdom was wrong: Connally ended up with a single delegate. His career was over.

Political analysts Henry Olsen and Dante J. Scala say Connally’s fate shouldn’t have been a surprise: All of his money and fame couldn’t win him the support of any one of the party’s major factions. By 1980, Reagan had become the undisputed leader of the conservative movement and the tribune of Evangelical voters. “Connally was no man’s moderate,” they write, “so any hope he had was to corner the somewhat-conservative vote and use it as his base.” Unfortunately for Connally, somewhat-conservative voters favored George H. W. Bush. And with no base, he had no chance. He was doomed.

Olsen has been arguing for years that Republican primary campaigns are misunderstood. His argument, made in articles in National Affairs and The National Interest and now expanded into this lucid and fascinating monograph, is that it’s wrong to see primaries as fights between conservatives and the establishment. The GOP is more complicated than that. Not two but four factions — somewhat conservatives, liberals and moderates, very conservative Evangelicals, and very conservative seculars — compete for dominance. “The winner is the person with the best message who appeals to at least two, and usually three, of the GOP’s factions.”

The somewhat conservatives are the silent plurality of the Republican party. They’re the voters to watch. “The candidate who garners their favor has won each of the last four open races,” note Olsen and Scala. Somewhat conservatives want experienced candidates who aren’t revolutionaries. They don’t want cultural warriors but optimistic leaders. Former House speaker John Boehner is their ideal. “They are conservative in both senses of the word; they prefer the ideals of American conservatism while displaying the cautious disposition of the Burkean.” They might not have read Edmund Burke, but they would vote for him if he showed up in Florida.

Then there are the moderate and liberal Republicans. There are more of them than you’d expect from reading the news. They are the second-largest category of GOP voters. Strong in such places as New Hampshire and Michigan, they are also present in the South. “The moderate or liberal voter,” write the authors, “seems motivated by a candidate’s secularism above all else.” A majority of these voters are pro-choice.

The power of the very conservative Evangelical vote is greater than its actual numbers. Very conservative Evangelicals are concentrated in the South and in caucus states such as Iowa, where they tend to determine the winner. They find the moral condition of the United States abhorrent and desire a restoration of traditional values. They want to outlaw abortion entirely, and they are more open to government intervention in the market and society than are other Republican voting blocs. They are vocal, passionate, and committed. And they turn other Republicans off.

Very conservative voters split along religious lines. The secular ones are overrepresented along the Acela corridor between Washington, D.C., and Boston but are the smallest Republican group. “This small but influential bloc likes urbane, fiscally oriented men,” write Olsen and Scala. Jack Kemp was the candidate of the very conservative seculars, and so is Kemp’s protégé, House speaker Paul Ryan. You watch the very conservative seculars to find out what elites are thinking. But the candidate they prefer at the beginning of the process never wins. “They invariably see their preferred candidate knocked out early, and they then invariably back whoever is supported by the somewhat-conservative bloc.”

This is a book for political junkies, and for readers who aren’t afraid of regression analyses. Olsen and Scala draw their findings from a close study of election returns, exit polling, and other surveys. “Exit and entrance polls of Republican primaries and caucuses going back to 2000,” they write, “show that the Republican presidential electorate is remarkably stable.” They discuss the 2000, 2008, and 2012 primaries in detail because, without an incumbent president or vice president, races become more open, fluid, and hence revealing. They find, unsurprisingly, that the importance of money is overrated in politics, but they also conclude that the idea of momentum is exaggerated. Early-state wins are important not because of abstractions such as “momentum” but because they sort candidates by group and determine the heralds of each of the four factions.

What does all this mean for the 2016 election? Iowa behaved as it normally does, voting for the candidate of very conservative Evangelicals (that would be Ted Cruz). But close behind him was Donald Trump, who split the somewhat-conservative and moderate vote with third-place finisher Marco Rubio. In New Hampshire, Trump won a blowout victory. He won the very conservative, the somewhat-conservative, and the moderate vote. John Kasich came in a distant second based on support from moderates and liberals.

As the race goes on, look to see where the somewhat-conservative voters go. The size of the Republican field has split their vote among several candidates, including Trump, Kasich, and Rubio. The man who consolidates their support is likely to be the nominee, with Ted Cruz challenging him as the leader of very conservative Evangelicals. Will the somewhat-conservative voters back a New York real-estate mogul who has never held political office? On this question the fate of the Republican primary campaign depends.

– Mr. Continetti is the editor-in-chief of the Washington Free Beacon and a columnist for Commentary.

In This Issue



Politics & Policy

A Justice in Full

National Review asked colleagues, friends, and family members of the late Justice Antonin Scalia to say some words about his mind and character. The editors thank Edward Whelan for ...

Books, Arts & Manners

Politics & Policy

Inside Man

Those familiar with the work of David Gelernter have come to expect both penetrating insight and a graceful, inviting presentation. This most recent book fully satisfies such expectations, even if ...
Politics & Policy

In the Cartoons

Here is the pitch. Deadpool is unlike any other superhero movie that you’ve ever seen. It’s savage, profane, darkly comic, and subversive. It’s a hard “R” for sex and violence ...


Politics & Policy


Opiate Withdrawal: Discomforting or Deadly? Kevin D. Williamson is mistaken as to the severity of withdrawal from opiates (“From Oxy to Overdose,” February 29). The withdrawal can be brutal, sometimes worse ...
Politics & Policy

The Week

‐ If Trump shot somebody on Fifth Avenue, Cruz and Rubio would blame each other. ‐ After a limp finish in South Carolina, Jeb Bush ended his campaign. He was felled ...

Into the Gophers’ Den

Milo Yiannopoulos is quick, clever, amusing, naughty, British yet charismatic, and would probably be the first to agree that his brand of Flaming Gayness could be seen from the International ...
Politics & Policy


FOLDS OF LIGHT The gentle folds within the flower of the lily, the gentle look of the folds of the robes of the Pietà, flower of a few days, or the stone of centuries, as ...
Happy Warrior

You Never Had It So Good

We are living through a truly historical election season. Or, actually, maybe we’re living through the fall of the republic. It’s difficult to tell some days. An unscientific survey of the ...

Most Popular

Film & TV

The Manly Appeal of Ford v Ferrari

There used to be a lot of overlap between what we think of as a Hollywood studio picture (designed to earn money) and an awards movie (designed to fill the trophy case, usually with an accompanying loss of money). Ford v Ferrari is a glorious throwback to the era when big stars did quality movies about actual ... Read More
Politics & Policy

ABC Chief Political Analyst: GOP Rep. Stefanik a ‘Perfect Example’ of the Failures of Electing Someone ‘Because They Are a Woman’

Matthew Dowd, chief political analyst for ABC News, suggested that Representative Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.) was elected due to her gender after taking issue with Stefanik's line of questioning during the first public impeachment hearing on Wednesday. “Elise Stefanik is a perfect example of why just electing ... Read More
White House

Trump vs. the ‘Policy Community’

When it comes to Russia, I am with what Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman calls the American “policy community.” Vindman, of course, is one of the House Democrats’ star impeachment witnesses. His haughtiness in proclaiming the policy community and his membership in it grates, throughout his 340-page ... Read More
Law & the Courts

DACA’s Day in Court

When President Obama unilaterally changed immigration policy after repeatedly and correctly insisting that he lacked the constitutional power to do it, he said that congressional inaction had forced his hand. In the case of his first major unilateral move — “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” which ... Read More
White House

Impeachment and the Broken Truce

The contradiction at the center of American politics in Anno Domini 2019 is this: The ruling class does not rule. The impeachment dog-and-pony show in Washington this week is not about how Donald Trump has comported himself as president (grotesquely) any more than early convulsions were about refreshed ... Read More