Magazine | February 19, 2018, Issue

Letters

Popularity Contest

In “Hearing the People” (January 22), a generally spot-on assessment of how Republicans should react to populism, Henry Olsen writes: “The combined might of the five core groups of movement conservatism had been unable to win a presidential election since 2004, and has carried the popular vote in only one presidential election since the fall of the Berlin Wall.” Analysts who paint a dire picture of the GOP’s prospects love to quote popular-vote results, but it’s like saying which team got more hits in a baseball game: mildly interesting but ultimately meaningless. The presidential popular vote is a crude approximation of an opinion poll, heavily influenced by the personal qualities of the two candidates (who, among other things, make no effort to compete in three of the four largest states). With all the actual opinion polling that’s available, not to mention congressional, gubernatorial, and legislative elections, why focus on this one small and statistically eccentric data set?

Olsen goes on to refute himself in the next sentence: “If the point of a coalition is to win . . .” Exactly. If the point of a coalition is to win, why does Olsen quote a statistic that has nothing to do with winning? The Republicans have won half the presidential elections since Reagan, so I’d say they’re doing just fine by that standard.

Jeremy Walton

Olathe, Kans.

Henry Olsen responds: There are two reasons to think that the popular-vote statistic matters. First, it indicates an ability to win House seats. Failing to do well in blue states over time means that there is less Republican support to elect House members in areas that might be open to GOP appeals. The likely loss of several such seats in California, Washington, Illinois, New York, and New Jersey in November will be the direct result of building a coalition that is too narrow to sustain itself over time.

The other reason has to do with enacting real change. A real change in the direction of the country can occur only when a supermajority of Americans get behind a president or his party over a series of elections. That is what produces the large majorities in Congress that can enact a series of changes, not just pass one bill such as Obamacare or the recent tax reform and then lose the majority immediately thereafter. Democrats changed America because they held such a supermajority of public opinion from 1932 until the end of Reagan’s first term. Conservatives who want to really rule and not simply slow down liberalism’s progress need to aspire to similar dominance.

NR Editors — NR Editors includes members of the editorial staff of the National Review magazine and website.

In This Issue

Articles

Features

Books, Arts & Manners

Sections

Letters

Letters

Popularity Contest In “Hearing the People” (January 22), a generally spot-on assessment of how Republicans should react to populism, Henry Olsen writes: “The combined might of the five core groups of ...
Politics & Policy

The Week

‐ “And here to speak for the party of diversity, inclusion, women, people of color, and a bold embrace of the future is . . . some guy named ‘Kennedy.’” ‐ ...
Poetry

Poetry

THIS MILKY WAY This Milky Way, our galaxy, contains A massive hole of blackness at its core, Where any photon striking it remains In unreflected absence evermore, While we perch on a speck upon a ...

Most Popular

World

EuroTrip

Dear Reader (Especially everyone who got ripped off ordering that giant blimp online), Imagine an alien race that built its civilization on the fact it literally defecated highly refined uranium, or super-intelligent and obedient nano-bots, or simply extremely useful Swiss Army knives. Now imagine one of ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Rise of the Abortion Cheerleaders

Is abortion a sad and unfortunate reality — regrettable, as we are sometimes told, but often necessary — or is it a breezy nothingburger, completely “normal,” and something to be giddily celebrated like a last-minute NFL touchdown?  For a long time, the abortion lobby has had difficulty deciding. This ... Read More
World

Europe Needs to Grow Up

It was a hot and difficult summer. And Europeans were pained to hear the blunt assessment that the U.S. would not be able to forever sustain NATO without greater investment on their part. The alliance was heading for “collective military irrelevance” and the current state of affairs was “unacceptable,” ... Read More