​The GOP’s state of disunion

Yesterday’s first Democratic primary debate provided a stark contrast to the previous two Republican debates. In the former, we saw a largely coherent stage of candidates. Helped by the fact that only five politicians were featured in CNN’s debate, the expectation for the first Democratic debate was that it would be more about substantive platform nuances and track records as candidates tried to distinguish themselves. On the other hand, the first Republican debate saw a packed stage of 17 candidates split across two time slots, a huge field that only narrowed by two in the month and a half leading up to the second debate last month. Confusion in the GOP over who their eventual nominee will be and more pressingly over what the party stands for will be catastrophic for the party, costing them elections, donors and their long-term voter base.

We can understand the state of the GOP by examining two major headlines that have flooded recent political news: the progression of the 2016 presidential primaries and the selection of the new speaker of the Republican-led House of Representatives. The 2016 presidential primary has largely been characterized by the dominance of outsider voices appealing to a frustrated Republican voter base, while the recent announcement by current Speaker John Boehner of his resignation hints at the radical right-wing forces reshaping the GOP on Capitol Hill.

The lateness of the GOP to substantive debates in the way of a smaller field is highly problematic for voters who will need to either learn why they are voting for Donald Trump or figure out who the remaining candidates are after Trump fades. The conversation at both debates so far has been dominated by banter and high-fives—helped along by Trump’s personality. The size of the GOP’s field and its celebrity character have caused the number of Republican candidate mentions to dwarf Democratic mentions on social media, television and newspapers and often in a way more akin to a political tabloid than political journalism when it comes to the most widely shared posts and tweets. We question whether a substantive conversation can ever occur with such a large field. Without a narrowing—and soon—voters will have too little to go on in the way of serious platform definition and engagement. This conversation contrasts manifestly with the debate among Democratic candidates to differentiate themselves.

Beyond how the dog and pony show stands to set back Republicans in the road to the White House, the GOP as it exists on Capitol Hill is working through its own crisis. John Boehner’s announcement of his resignation late last month speaks of the pressures exerted by an increasingly radical brand of conservatism in Washington. The Freedom Caucus and revolutionaries who make a crisis of every negotiation are concentrating their own viewpoints to the detriment of legislative progress. The sharp right turn of the Republican party in recent election cycles has further disenchanted many young republicans trying to find exemplars of old conservatism, to hold platforms and ideologies they can reconcile with the momentum of social justice movements and to have career politicians they can improve upon. Overwhelmingly, they find none of this in the Tea Party and Freedom Caucus.

As the GOP looks to find its star candidate and its ideological center, we echo the frustration felt by many Americans about the lack of excellent conservative leaders. No matter your political affiliation, an unbalanced political climate on campus and across the nation benefits nobody with the consequent lack of political debate. Well-constructed platforms and coherent, widely palatable ideologies along with a serious look at where voters and the media should be directing their attention in the presidential race will be vital to the long-term prospects of the GOP.