Movement conservatives a lot like Democratic socialists — both just fractions of their parties

OPINION:

In an weekend interview, presumed GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump made an insightful comment, saying “this is called the Republican Party, it’s not called the Conservative Party.”

He made it after House Speaker Paul Ryan, who identifies as a movement conservative, said he wasn’t ready to endorse the presumed Republican presidential contender. Mr. Ryan’s sentiment gave cover to others who share his ideology, many of whom have pledged to never support Mr. Trump.

The reason? They all consider themselves part of the conservative movement, which helped elect Ronald Reagan to office. They simply don’t believe Mr. Trump represents this movement or shares its ideology.

It’s akin to Vermont Sen. Bernard Sanders saying he’s not going to support Hillary Clinton when she wins the Democratic nomination because she’s not a socialist.

The entire thing is absurd.

For the basic reality between both Mr. Sanders’ Democratic socialist movement and the conservative movement is this: They don’t have the numbers to represent majorities in their respective parties. Therefore, they don’t get to dictate the terms.

The GOP have always been the party of the big tent. Some are attracted to Republicanism because of their libertarian values, others are constitutionalists, some are isolationists, others neocons. Evangelicals flock to the Party, as do fiscal and economic conservatives. Some Republicans would like there to be less emphasis on social issues and more on economic ones. Others would like to maintain entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare, but are ardent supporters of the pro-life community.

Mr. Ryan had his conservative candidate (that voters were actually voting for) — and it was Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. Mr. Cruz’s a strict constitutionalist, believes ardently in conservative economic and social issues, and although he’s less interventionist than many neocons preferred, his position was acceptable to most. Mr. Cruz consistently won the “very conservative” vote state by state.

Yet it wasn’t enough.

According to pollster Harry Enten of FiveThirtyEight: “’very conservative’ voters… are far from a majority within the Republican Party. Even in the Deep South state of Mississippi, ’very conservative’ voters made up only 47 percent of Republican voters in this year’s primary. Cruz’s average share among ’very conservative’ voters so far this year — 38 percent — isn’t high enough to make up for his deficit with other parts of the party.”

Before he dropped out, Mr. Cruz won Indiana’s “very conservative” voters and almost two-thirds of those who attend religious services more than once a week, but there just wasn’t enough of them.

Mr. Trump won Indiana by double-digits — sweeping all but five precincts in the state — and by winning all other demographics, education and income levels. The “somewhat conservative” and “moderate conservatives” like Mr. Trump and have consistently turned out for him.

Republican voter turnout is up over 60 percent, and at the end of the day, Mr. Trump will receive more GOP primary votes than anyone in history. Mr. Trump is also driving Democrats in states like Nevada, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts to switch political parties.

Which leads me to ask the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol and Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse, who have both been pushing the idea of a movement conservative third-party candidate: if one were to run, who exactly would they represent?

The “very conservative” crowd doesn’t have the numbers to win, and the “somewhat conservatives” who haven’t chosen Mr. Trump have proven to be a very fickle constituency. They had 18 GOP choices in August, found fault with them all, and couldn’t unify behind one.

So unless Mr. Kristol and Mr. Sasse’s goal is to blow up the Republican Party (which it could be), movement conservatives should take a page out of Mr. Sanders’ book.

Mr. Sanders — who knows he’s going to lose the Democratic nomination to Mrs. Clinton — is vying to change the Democratic Party’s platform. He’s vowed to stay in the race until his party’s convention so that he has a shot at shaping its agenda.

So, too, should movement conservatives. Instead of floating the idea of a third-party run or threatening not to attend July’s convention, they should be finding their seat at the table and be ready to advocate for their ideas and platforms in the Republican Party’s agenda.

For political parties are bigger than any one man. And neither movement conservatives or Democratic socialists can win by themselves come November — they need their respective parties so their voices can be heard.