We use cookies to help us deliver our online services. By using our website or by closing this message box, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Cookie Policy.
Do not show again
DOW JONES, A NEWS CORP COMPANY
Sections
Aim higher, reach further.
Get the Wall Street Journal $12 for 12 weeks. Subscribe Now
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers visit http://www.djreprints.com.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/obamas-greatest-triumph-1459379804

Obama’s Greatest Triumph

He is six months away from destroying both the Republican Party and Reagan’s legacy.

Opinion Journal Video

Wonder Land Columnist Dan Henninger on how President Obama destroyed Ronald Reagan's conservative legacy. Photo credit: Associated Press.
.
By
Daniel Henninger
Barack Obama will retire a happy man. He is now close to destroying his political enemies—the Republican Party, the American conservative movement and the public-policy legacy of Ronald Reagan.
Today, the last men standing amidst the debris of the Republican presidential competition are Donald Trump, a political independent who is using the Republican Party like an Uber car; Ted Cruz, who used the Republican Party as a footstool; and John Kasich, a remnant of the Reagan revolution, who is being told by Republicans to quit.
History may quibble, but this death-spiral began with Barack Obama’s health-care summit at Blair House on Feb. 25, 2010. For a day, Republicans gave detailed policy critiques of the proposed Affordable Care Act. When it was over, the Democrats, including Mr. Obama, said they had heard nothing new.
That meeting was the last good-faith event in the Obama presidency. Barack Obama killed politics in Washington that day because he had no use for it, and has said so many times. The Democrats survived the Obama desert by going to ground. But frustrated Republicans outside Congress eventually started tearing each other apart.
After Mr. Obama won in 2008, Democrats controlled the Senate and House with large majorities. Normally, a party out of power is disabled but not destroyed by the presidency’s advantages. Democrats, when out of power, historically remain intact until the wheel turns again. Their ideology has been simple: tax and spend.
The minority Republicans began well. In 2010, ObamaCare passed with zero Republican Senate votes, and Dodd-Frank with only one Republican Senate vote. It was a remarkable display of party discipline.
In the first term, Republicans and conservatives fought Barack Obama. In the second term, they decided it made more sense to fight each other.
Among the reasons is that the Republican leadership missed the messaging force of social media until it was too late. Congressional politics is mostly process. Modern politics is mostly message. The Obama message machine, “tax cuts for millionaires,” never stopped.
With no party spokesman for conservatism, an ideological vacuum existed. Freelance operators filled it.
They included two hyper-ambitious Senate freshman, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. They also included a movement to purge and cleanse conservatism, led by groups such as Heritage Action and by talk radio hosts. Together they conjured an internal enemy—the Republican Establishment.
Conservatives complain constantly about the bias of the mainstream media. With the bar so low on website entry, members-only media alternatives emerged, such as RedState and Breitbart News.
But the hated MSM is essentially a Roman phalanx. It stays in formation and protects the progressive castle. The conservative alternatives showed no such discipline. Early into the second Obama term, they commenced an internecine political war.
The right began demanding that congressional Republicans conduct ritualistic suicide raids on the Obama presidency. The MSM would have depicted these as hapless defeats by presidential veto, but some wanted the catharsis of constant public losses—on principle.
By early 2015, when the primary season began, virtually all issues inside the Republican Party had been reframed as proof of betrayal—either of conservative principle or of “the middle class.” Trade is a jobs sellout. Immigration reform is amnesty.
With his Cheshire Cat grin, Barack Obama faded into the background and let the conservatives’ civil war rip. For Republicans, every grievance, slight or loss became a scab to be picked, day after day.
In time, the attacks on “the establishment” and “donor class” became indiscriminate, ostracizing good people in the party and inside the conservative movement. The anti-establishment offensive created a frenzy faction inside the Republican base. And of course, it produced Donald Trump.
The Trumpians and Cruzians, who of late have been knifing one another in a blind rage, say this is a rebirth. So was Rosemary’s baby.
The New York Times NYT 0.28 % this week published a lead piece by Nicholas Confessore called “How the G.O.P. Elite Lost Its Voters to Donald Trump.” It is a gleeful, disingenuous and malign burial of the one thing the Democratic left never thought it could kill: Ronald Reagan’s conservative legacy.
The piece, which mostly transcribes the opinions of “some conservative intellectuals,” is a road map to Republican self-destruction, delegitimizing everything Ronald Reagan stood for—tax cuts, deregulation, entitlement reform, even economic growth. (Archaic footnote: Reaganomics produced an historic economic boom, for everyone, from 1983-90.)
Conservatives, it says, instead of challenging the economy Barack Obama rendered half-dead for two terms, now favor “wage subsidies, relocation aid” and “even targeted infrastructure spending.”
And Citizens United merely enabled the “donor class,” identified as Paul Singer and Charles and David Koch, who favor the discredited “Ryan budgets,” a proxy for Reagan.
In early 2015, Republicans were one election away from defeating a weak Democratic opponent and controlling both houses of Congress. Barring a miracle in Cleveland, they likely are six months away from losing two of those three plus the Supreme Court.
Barack Obama should frame the Confessore piece and hang it in the Obama Library. His presidency produced a moribund U.S. economy for eight years. In a response so bizarre that future historians will gape, the Republicans decided to destroy each other.
Write to henninger@wsj.com
896 comments
+ Follow
Post comment
 
Link
Tom Schalek
Tom Schalek subscriber 5pts
"...virtually all issues inside the Republican Party had been reframed as proof of betrayal—either of conservative principle or of “the middle class.” Trade is a jobs sellout. Immigration reform is amnesty."
Acknowledging and promoting a solution to trade treaty imbalances/unfairness, other than with lip service or citing  "creative destruction", would help;
until the WSJ renounces its famous "There Shall Be Open Borders" declaration, any high and mighty talk of "immigration reform" (by their definition) falls into the category of once bitten twice shy.
The reason for discord is that there is more energy and vitriol directed at muting their fly-over voters than is directed at coming up with strategies to counter the Dems - regardless of minority or majority status. 
Angela Murphy
Angela Murphy subscriber 5pts
Wow--I guess Mr. Henninger completely forgot about  Mr. McConnell's number one priority "the defeat of President Obama . What followed was utter disregard for the good of the country. 
Stop the griping and look in the mirror!
Andrew Poplaski
Andrew Poplaski subscriber 5pts
Democrats blame President Bush, Republicans blame President Obama.  Am I supposed to be surprised?
EDWARD BALLOW
EDWARD BALLOW subscriber 5pts
Since the "Tea Party" republicans took control of the House, Senate and a vast majority of governorships and state houses.  Facts matter... 
Frank Slootman
Frank Slootman subscriber 5pts
Look no further than Europe where they effectively killed off political opposition from the right over the past few decades. The left has been a permanent fixture of government, unchallenged and unopposed. It is a cesspool of socialism, hollowed out individual liberties and permanent economic stagnation over there.
Preston Smith
Preston Smith subscriber 5pts
Donald Trump is the goose that lays golden eggs for the GOP. In Pennsylvania, 180,000 Democrats have changed their voter registration so, I am certain, to vote for Trump. Not Cruz or Kasich. The sad thing is that the polls showing Trump can't beat Clinton ("He's back 11 points. Oh No!!!!") and all hope is lost is just another indication how totally wrong all these polls and pundits have been about Trump ever since he declared last June. 

Mr. Henninger----I see the glass has more than half full. If you think Obama and Clinton are so invincible, you deserve to write the column you did. 
Robert Thompson
Robert Thompson subscriber 5pts
I think Mr. Henninger is giving President Obama a bit too much credit here. He did not destroy the republicans or the Reagan revolution; they committed suicide. 
The democrats are also in the process of doing this.
It's what President Adams predicted long ago: "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." 
Pat Foster
Pat Foster subscriber 5pts
This is why I support Sanders over Clinton in the Democratic race and may even vote for him in the general election if given the chance.  This country is going to have to hit rock bottom before things can improve, and his policies will take us there quickly.  The young and foolish will have to learn first-hand what socialist policies do, since our education system has so totally failed them. Then maybe there is a chance for a Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan to take over and bring us back.
ROBERT L CORNELL
ROBERT L CORNELL subscriber 5pts
@Pat Foster It's looking like Cruz versus Sanders to me.  A stark choice and we will be able to see whether their are more conservatives or progressives.

The RNC and the super-pacs should start running ads to introduce Reagan to young people and articulate why limited government and strong, non-interventionist, foreign policy made the 1980s a turning point in our country's history.
Jay Davidson
Jay Davidson subscriber 5pts
Intense introspection is a necessary element of life, death and spiritual rebirth. Although painful, it is needed. The Republican Party would do well to cast itself as the party of fiscal conservancy and freedom for the individual. It would do well to eschew all social-issues that should remain between God and the individual. Like abortion.
Democrats laugh at our pain, but they lack the courage and conviction to question just how far their party has moved left; the Democratic Party is a shell of the JFK party I once knew.
Jay Davidson
Jay Davidson subscriber 5pts
Look to your own party: a burnt out socialist and another lying Clinton.
Mary Goodson
Mary Goodson subscriber 5pts
@Jeff Marshall Yeah but the democrat party has bigger and uglier clowns running for president.  Plus they have the King Clown currently playing POTUS.

Compared to the democrat clowns, the Republican candidates actually look qualified.
Emmett Wood
Emmett Wood subscriber 5pts
My party is getting what it deserves.
Stop pandering to extremists within. Cast them off!
  Be real capitalists - not crony capitalists.  Stop spending, dollar-for-dollar, to keep pace with the Democrats, if on different forms of "welfare", and "winner-picking" (i.e. corporate welfare).
  Stay out of people's bedrooms, living rooms.
  Party leaders - Summon the spine to say Trump is a blight and, in no uncertain terms, declare you won't support him if he wins the election.  don't mince words. Have the directness of a Donald Trump, without the uninformed (no, ignorant), stream-of-unconsciousness-sourced, gutter-mouthed, bigoted invective.
  Don't meet hypocrisy with hypocrisy, and puerile petulance - refuse discusson and hearings for SCOTUS nominees because Joe Biden and Harry Reid did it first, and trot out specious arguments of honoring "principle".
  Don't connive and dissemble.
  Keep religion out of politics.
  State most stridently what're you're FOR, not against.
  Geeeez!
   
Tom Boucher
Tom Boucher subscriber 5pts
Wrong again, Dan.

The GOP is in trouble because they did nothing to stop Barry.
Jeff Marshall
Jeff Marshall user 5pts
@Tom Boucher I sense sheer panic in right winger land.  I think the American people are going to stop the GOP this November.  I wouldn't be surprised if Democrats win big like they did in 2008 ... the White House and majorities in the House and Senate.
Mary Goodson
Mary Goodson subscriber 5pts
@Jeff Marshall @Tom Boucher I don't sense panic at all, except in the democrat party.  Doubt the democrats win big, but it would be "funny" if Bernie the Buffoon won versus Hillary the Hateful.  Maybe the American people need to get a taste of failed socialism to see how it has always failed.  Apparently they don't teach that concept in public schools anymore, obviously.
Ron Gregory
Ron Gregory subscriber 5pts
Dan, you are giving way too much credit to Barack Obama.  The Republican party did this to themselves, with a lot of help from the MSM (main-stream media).
GENIE BAKALE-ALDRICH
GENIE BAKALE-ALDRICH subscriber 5pts
@Ron Gregory P R E C I S E L Y....... Soetoro is a disturbed narcissist, and thinks only of himself.  He's cunning, evil and unabalanced, but not that smart.  The GOP has been 'running for the tall grass' for a long time.  They abandoned their principles - goals - constituents.  They were too busy protecting their position at the tough. Hence, Donald Trump.... Cowards - the lot of them.... They get what they deserve.  
Tracy Agee
Tracy Agee subscriber 5pts
The drumbeat of "it's O'bummers fault" is amazing. 
I have an itch on my back I can't reach! Must be *his* fault. 

Politics are a mess, a grand old mess. 

Big part of that is the finger pointing and non-stop blame.
Steven Williams
Steven Williams subscriber 5pts
It is clear that will the help of the media the basic principles of conservatism, individual responsibility, limited government, and an economy the operates under free market principles, have lost to the left.  When Hillary takes over next year the growth government will increase dramatically. The liberals will have their day, but now their vision will have to show results.  I suspect they will crash and burn.  All you have to have watched 60 Minutes over the last two years to see the many failures of big government, the VA Hospital, abuse at the IRS, fraud  at  medicare, the disability scams, and list goes.  Yes the liberals have won but the victory will be short-lived.
Keith Summar
Keith Summar subscriber 5pts
There is nothing wrong with the 2016 election process.  An election is supposed to be a brutal competitive process in the sense that it best demonstrates the strengths, weaknesses and beliefs of  each candidate. That is what we are seeing in 2016. 
Recent elections (the Republican side) have come across more like  an attempt  to  promote the safest choice for office branch manager. The candidate should speak well, look nice, not make waves, and promote the company line. 
The 2016 primaries were heading in that direction but things quickly went off course.  Many voters don't want just another branch manager.  Many voters want a strong instrument for change.
There is certainly a greater  risk in selecting such a candidate, and the establishment is adverse to risk.  The strong candidate may shake things up.  The strong candidate may not tote the company line and will definitely bring a gun to a knife fight.  Many think It is time to get out from behind the wall. 
Judith Grayson
Judith Grayson subscriber 5pts
our faux president's only triumph has been staying away from psychiatric evaluation where he would be diagnosed as clinically insane and deteriorating faster than his fake american president business card.
ROBERT L CORNELL
ROBERT L CORNELL subscriber 5pts
Vigorous debate is a sign of health.  The process is working and the Republican Party will emerge from this election much stronger and most likely with a winning candidate and winning positions.
IAN DALE
IAN DALE subscriber 5pts
Daniel, you're glossing over a critical mistake you, and the conservative press made:  You note in today's column that Congressional Republicans to a man (or woman) voted against the ACA in 2010.  But that same year (and in '12), YOU (and others) cheered on the Tea Party for kicking out hard working Republicans, branding them "RINOs".  In many cases, booting out "fake Republicans" resulted in the election (or re-election) of real Democrats.  Every editorial and op-ed in the WSJ cheered as the "RINO" Dick Lugar lost re-nomination to Richard Mourdock.  Result:  Donnelly the Dem elected. In Missouri, the Tea Party goes for broke and nominates Todd Akin.  Result:  Claire McCaskill re-elected. 

So- I think it's a bit rich at this point for the Journal to decry the state of the GOP- a condition the Journal helped bring about.  Nice going. 
hank grabois
hank grabois user 5pts

Every editorial and op-ed in the WSJ cheered as the "RINO" Dick Lugar lost re-nomination to Richard Mourdock.
=============================
Incorrect. But I'm VERY glad that you brought it up. I've been a political junkie since grammar school (so since circa 1964) and in 2012 had been living in Indiana for two decades. So I REALLY paid attention to that one. Lugar, a long-time fave (personal, but of the state as a whole).

Peggy Noonan wrote this column about Lugar:
Title of column? The Case for Sending Senator Lugar back to Washington. Hundreds
of comments, overwhelmingly of the 'he's a RINO; throw the bum out' sort.

I, seemingly alone but possibly I missed some 'allies', cited Lugar's high ACU rating, his expertise in foreign affairs etc. And I was one of the few who participated who lived in Indiana and knew the score as to Donnelly's likely victory if Lugar wasn't renominated.

But the "purists" are not only
hank grabois
hank grabois user 5pts

politically ignorant (partly because they live in a 'conservative media bubble', whereas that is just inconceivable to me!), they are unteachable. Complete silence on Lugar/Mourdock/Donnelly after Election Day 2012. Wouldn't want to admit they were wrong. And by the way, Romney only lost by 3.9%, whereas
Mourdock lost by about 6%.

The purists cut off their (political) noses to spite their faces.
Jacob Maczuga
Jacob Maczuga subscriber 5pts
What about the unrepairable damage that Obymal's done to the democRats?  Just look at its entrenched septuagenarian leadership?
jakob hamm
jakob hamm subscriber 5pts
This article is breath taking in its accuracy. It is exactly what has happened. Ever since the start of the Tea Party (and its subsequent invasion of the Republican Party) the Republicans have found themselves stuck in a constant internal struggle that is destroying the party. At this point, Civil War may very well be necessary for the party to ever fix itself. 
EDWARD BALLOW
EDWARD BALLOW subscriber 5pts
@jakob hamm Since the "Tea Party" republicans took control of the House, Senate and a vast majority of governorships and state houses.  Facts matter... 

MICHAEL DION
MICHAEL DION subscriber 5pts
The current go along to get along Republican leadership in Congress killed Ronald Reagan’s conservative legacy.  Not the Democrats.  The Democrats merely feed the machine some bait and watched it erode from within.
Listen to any Republican ad and they brag about how "conservative" they are.  Dig into their voting patterns and you rarely see them supporting true conservative issues.
Sadly, both parties have moved to the left as if the 1980's never happened.  Then you have one candidate, Cruz, who truly stands on conservative principals, is willing to fight for them, and he is mocked by his party's leadership.
Lastly, add in the media who contributes to this mess.  They promote gutter politics and build up personal attacks instead of analyzing and reporting on the issues that we face.  They do so because it is easier and everyone likes a schoolyard brawl.  Unfortunately, the survival of our country is at stake.  Guess they forgot to report on that.  Or maybe to them, this doesn't matter.
.
jakob hamm
jakob hamm subscriber 5pts
@MICHAEL DION Cruz is mocked because he's a jerk. Not because he lacks conservative principles. He's the opposite of Bernie Sanders. Just about every Senator respects Sanders, even when they totally disagree with him. Cause he's generally known as a nice guy. Cruz on the other hand intentionally picked battles with his fellow Republicans and took pyrrhic victories wherever he could. That is why he is mocked, and it is why he is hated. Because he's a jerk. And worse yet, he's a smug jerk. 
George de Luna
George de Luna subscriber 5pts
@jakob hamm @MICHAEL DION No, Cruz gets heat because he has the principles to stand up and do what he said he would do in spite of political expedience. That is why the rest don't like him, because he showed them up and showed the courage of his convictions. That is why he is in contention for the presidency. Those who haven't been fooled by establishment Republicans recognize this.
Kathy Strand
Kathy Strand subscriber 5pts
I generally agree with your columns, but this is simply one pettish take among many possible dissections of our current state of affairs, and a simplistic one at that.  I concur with this statement:  "In early 2015, Republicans were one election away from defeating a weak Democratic opponent and controlling both houses of Congress. Barring a miracle in Cleveland, they likely are six months away from losing two of those three plus the Supreme Court."  The causation for this sorry conclusion includes  a lot more than your reasoning suggests.  
Byron Watson
Byron Watson subscriber 5pts
Translation: Henninger wanted Jeb Bush to be the nominee.
Barry Reagan
Barry Reagan subscriber 5pts
I am having trouble understanding what position Ted Cruz advocates that is at odds with a Reagan policy.  Yes, Cruz fought losing battles.  But he fought where others surrendered.  I recall Dan Henninger having a conniption over the Republican led "government shut down."  The truth is that it was a government paid vacation for a relatively small percentage of federal employees.  Obama vindictively shut down National Parks and Monuments to get his way.  Cruz stood out by trying to stand up to him and he was viciously attacked by Henninger and others from the WSJ.

Roy Becerra
Roy Becerra subscriber 5pts
@Barry Reagan The problem with Cruz is he was born at the wrong time.  He should have run in 1964 or 1980.
Leon Pesenson
Leon Pesenson subscriber 5pts
@Roy Becerra @Barry Reagan Didn't everyone say that Ronald Reagan is living in the past when he ran in 1976 and 1980? Ideas that the Constitution is based on are timeless, it is a question of whether the population of the country can appreciate them. Then again it is not clear that the current American voters understand anything about their own government.
jakob hamm
jakob hamm subscriber 5pts
@Barry Reagan Because it was always a pyrrhic victory. The media never would have told the truth, and the Republicans were always going to take the blame for the shut down. Party leaders and the WSJ were screaming because poll numbers kept dropping, i.e. Americans kept blaming the Republicans for the shut down. Clearly, Ted wasn't winning. 
Show More Archives
Advertisement

Popular on WSJ

Editors’ Picks

Copyright 2014 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%