Like her or not, Peggy Noonan makes this point today in the WSJ:Is there a war against the establishment and will we see more presidents elected without holding office if Trumps second term goes well? I definitely see more political outsiders as a serious option but it would still be limited to a wealthy individual. Trump didn’t need campaign money and couldn’t be bought, doesn’t need to use the office to enrich himself. You have to consider that Trumps term would be even better if the dems and sometimes reps wouldn’t resist at every turn. Look at the accomplishments with a house that’s more hostile than Isis.
The benefit of having held an office before is experience but bad experience is more of the same, meaning learning the big government machine makes you part of it. Due to the unique circumstances I don’t see this duplicated for a long time, the circumstances are too rare. I’m glad I got to see us throw somebody at the establishment that is doing what we always wanted to do ourselves and be successful while the machine fights it.
"Republicans in 2016 were to the right of party leaders, elders and professionals on essential issues—immigration, political correctness, the LGBTQ regime and the arguments it spurred in the town council about bathroom policies, and in schools over such questions as, “Are we still allowed in sports to have a girls team composed of biological girls and a boy’s team composed of biological boys? Will we be sued?”
They knew that on these questions and others the party’s establishments didn’t really care about their views or share them.
When Republicans rebel against the status quo, it’s a powerful thing. They produced in their 2016 rebellion something new: They changed the nature of the presidency itself. The pushing back against elites entailed a pushing against standards. (Meaning Deep State standards to us, but PN would never get that.) It’s always possible a coming presidential election will look like a snap-back to the old days, a senator versus a governor, one experienced political professional against another. But we will never really go back to the old days. Anyone can become president now, anyone big and colorful and in line with prevailing public sentiment.
We have entered the age of the postheroic presidency. Certain low ways are forgiven, certain rough ways now established. Americans once asked a lot of their presidents. They had to be people not only of high competence and solid, sober backgrounds, but high character. In modern presidencies you can trace a line from, say, Harry S. Truman, who had it in abundance, to Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan, who also did.
But the heroic conception of the presidency is over. Bill Clinton and his embarrassments damaged it. Two unwon wars and the great recession killed it. “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor” buried it. When you deliberately lie like that, you are declaring you have no respect for the people. And the people noticed.
They (Conserves) would like to have someone admirable in the job, someone whose virtues move them, but they’ve decided it’s not necessary. They think: Just keep the economy growing, don’t start any new wars, and push back against the social-issues maximalists if you can.
In the last cycle we spoke of shy Trump voters—those who didn’t want to get in an argument over supporting him. I suspect this cycle we’ll call them closeted Trump voters—those who don’t want to be associated with the postheroic moment, who disapprove of it, but see no realistic alternative."