How an Alternative Donald Trump Opening Act Might Have Unfolded
April 24 2017 - 12:24PM
Dow Jones News
By Gerald F. Seib
Let's imagine an alternative opening act to the Trump
presidency.
Specifically, let's imagine a presidency that attempted from the
outset to take advantage of the fact that Donald Trump isn't an
ideological conservative or a traditional Republican, but rather a
radical centrist who should be able to create unconventional,
bipartisan coalitions.
Imagine this new president had given a different kind of
inaugural address, one in which he didn't accuse the capital's
political leaders of flourishing at the expense of its citizens but
rather sketched out a vision of a new way of working with those
leaders.
This presidency wouldn't have started with polarizing issues
guaranteed to back both parties further into their corners: aiming
to repeal the Democrats' signature health-care law and imposing a
ban on travel from a set of Muslim-majority countries as the first
step in fighting terrorism. Rather, it would have opened with two
big initiatives in which at least a few Democrats would have been
willing -- maybe even eager in some cases -- to cooperate:
rebuilding American infrastructure and changing the nation's
inefficient tax code.
This alternative presidency would have set out from the
beginning to build bridges to the 10 Democratic senators up for
re-election in 2018 from states Mr. Trump carried, and the 12 House
members who represent districts Mr. Trump carried in 2016. In this
Trump presidency, the cabinet he chose would have been populated
with fewer ideological conservatives and instead would have
included with some moderate Democrats.
As the Trump presidency approaches its 100-day mark Saturday,
it's easy to imagine that Mr. Trump, given a do-over, might choose
this kind of opening act. It would have capitalized on his
strongest single asset, which is the fact that he isn't the product
of the traditional party system but rather that rarest of things in
Washington, a genuine free agent.
The suspicion that Mr. Trump might wish he had chosen a
different opening path is buttressed by the fact that the figures
now ascendant in the administration's power structure -- son-in-law
Jared Kushner, daughter Ivanka Trump, National Economic Council
director Gary Cohn, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin -- all fit
into this kind of nonpartisan mold.
On more practical terms, such an opening would have diminished
rather than accentuated the power and leverage of the House Freedom
Caucus, the band of the House's most conservative members who dealt
the president his most grievous early blow in the collapse of the
effort to repeal and replace Obamacare.
In a narrowly divided, highly partisan environment, the power of
any such small group is enhanced because even a few votes spell the
difference between success and failure. A president with a broader
power base can't be held hostage by any one faction.
Mr. Trump's populist appeal isn't rooted in partisanship but, in
many ways, actually should transcend partisanship and ideology.
That is seen in a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. The survey
shows that basic economic issues are more important to Americans
right now than are other domestic issues, including health care.
Americans are inclined to think the government should be doing
more, not less, to help solve them.
Only one in 10 Americans in the poll sees Mr. Trump as a typical
Republican. The vast majority in both parties consider him a
different kind of Republican, and they are more likely to say
that's a good thing rather than a bad thing.
This picture raises a couple of pertinent questions. The first
is whether it really was possible to move down a nonpartisan path
-- or whether anti-Trump passions at the base of the Democratic
Party would have made it impossible to do so. In other words, did
Mr. Trump drive away Democrats, or did Democrats drive him further
into the arms of fellow Republicans?
It's impossible to know for sure, of course, and certainly both
forces were at work to some extent. The one thing that seems clear
is that some of Mr. Trump's more divisive early actions, decisions
and priorities made it easier for Democratic activists to create
pressure on their representatives to take a never-cooperate
position.
The more important question is whether it's too late to adopt a
different approach. The answer: Of course not, after fewer than 100
days have passed. As noted, the president and his team already are
pivoting toward a more centrist approach on some fronts.
Tax reform, infrastructure and national security all give Mr.
Trump openings to become that builder of unconventional coalitions.
The new Journal/NBC News poll indicates the most significant
erosion in the president's standing since taking office has been
among political independents. There's plenty of time to give them
the kind of president they are looking for.
Write to Gerald F. Seib at jerry.seib@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
April 24, 2017 12:09 ET (16:09 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2017 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.