SVG
Commentary
The Federalist

Why Trump And Ryan Are Ideal Political Partners

Jeff Anderson: Their blended views would pretty closely reflect rank-and-file Republicans

U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan, left, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington D.C., on Nov. 5, 2015, and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in Cedar Rapids, Iowa,on Feb. 1, 2016. (Xinhua/Yin Bogu via Getty Images)
Caption
U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan, left, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington D.C., on Nov. 5, 2015, and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in Cedar Rapids, Iowa,on Feb. 1, 2016. (Xinhua/Yin Bogu via Getty Images)

Some might view House Speaker Paul Ryan鈥檚 recent endorsement of Donald Trump as evidence that opposites attract. In terms of age, demeanor, and life experiences, their differences are certainly more striking than their similarities. With a potential Trump presidency on the horizon, a key question is whether the two men鈥檚 equally stark differences on matters of policy鈥攅specially on immigration, trade, and big-government health care鈥攃ould potentially prove complementary and reflect the will of GOP voters.

Although most Republican leaders seem determined not to think about it, Republican voters nearly mutinied this year over the issue of (illegal) immigration. Indeed, with Trump preparing to accept the party鈥檚 presidential nomination next month, one could argue that it wasn鈥檛 just a near-mutiny.

Even before 2016, there had been plenty of strong indications that Republican elites and Republican voters weren鈥檛 remotely on the same page on this issue: Two years ago, political novice Dave Brat not only beat House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a historic upset but blew him out, by 11 points. (Brat is a gifted politician, but his win was still extraordinary.) Last year, Gallup鈥檚 polling that 84 percent of Republicans (and 60 percent of all Americans) were 鈥渄issatisfied with the level of immigration into the country today.鈥� Among all respondents, only 7 percent said they were 鈥渄issatisfied鈥� and wanted 鈥渕ore鈥� immigration.

We Want Immigration Under Control Already
The actual stats on immigration are striking and support the notion that the citizenry鈥檚 views, as suggested in Gallup鈥檚 polling, are actually quite reasonable: Immigrants鈥� percentage of the U.S. population is now 13.6 percent and rising (). Although mainstream reporting generally implies the opposite, that鈥檚 actually higher than during the immigration heydays of 1880 or 1920 (, respectively). It鈥檚 also up almost threefold from 1970 ().

Moreover, much of the immigration since 1970 has been illegal, a large reason it hasn鈥檛 led to as much assimilation as past immigration waves (although, as my 华体会 colleague John Fonte and his coauthor Stanley Kurtz , there are other strong forces deliberately working against assimilation as well). In truth, the only other issue that could potentially have galvanized voters as much as immigration has (and it may still do so in the general election) is Obamacare. But nobody in the Republican field ran on Obamacare. (This was Ted Cruz鈥檚 .)

Some pundits continue to deny that immigration was really that big of an issue in this year鈥檚 GOP race, because exit polling found that it consistently trailed 鈥渆conomy/jobs,鈥� 鈥済overnment spending,鈥� and 鈥渢errorism鈥� among the list of 鈥渋ssues that matter most.鈥� But the very fact that immigration was being mentioned in the company of such huge issues鈥攖he economy, spending, security鈥攚as in itself telling. Many voters who care about immigration view it largely as an economic matter and therefore likely listed 鈥渆conomy/jobs鈥� as the biggest issue.

As I last year, 鈥淲hile Mark Zuckerberg and others lobby for increased levels of immigration while living in communities that are of a middle class, , , and (among others) have sensibly argued that granting the wishes of Zuckerberg and Co. isn鈥檛 particularly consistent with focusing on the economic well-being of everyday Americans.鈥�

Beyond immigration, Republican voters are skeptical of Republican elites鈥� widely held view that seeing 鈥淢ade in China鈥� stamped on seemingly every product sold on our shores is somehow evidence of American greatness. While everyday Republicans aren鈥檛 ready to abandon the notion of free trade, their views on the matter do seem closer to those of the American Founders than to those of Republicans dining at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington. Trump, of course, has made hay with this issue as well.

We Want Spending Curtailed, Too
At the same time, most rank-and-file Republicans care greatly about reining in federal spending. A little-noticed fact from this year鈥檚 exit polling was how much GOP voters emphasized profligate spending (and the nearly $20 trillion鈥攁nd rising鈥攊n national debt it has produced). In Iowa entrance polling, Republican voters said 鈥済overnment spending鈥� was the number-one issue鈥攊t even beat out 鈥渆conomy/jobs.鈥� In Texas, Missouri, and Wisconsin, 鈥済overnment spending鈥� finished second, losing to 鈥渆conomy/jobs鈥� by less than 5 points.

So where does all of this leave us? Ryan supported the 鈥淕ang of Eight鈥� immigration efforts (the very efforts that effectively derailed Marco Rubio鈥檚 presidential hopes). Ryan is also an unabashed champion of free trade. In other words, he is pretty close to the opposite of Trump on each of Trump鈥檚 two signature issues.

Meanwhile, Ryan has made his name by fighting runaway entitlement spending. While he has since receded into the background on Obamacare, he was once the conservative movement鈥檚 finest spokesman against it and could potentially become so again. (See the and on the night Obamacare passed the House with no bipartisan support and only three votes to spare.) His proposed Medicare reforms, a sort of 鈥淢edicare Advantage Plus,鈥� are a crucial part of reining in federal spending and have gained the support of almost every Republican member of Congress. Trump, meanwhile, has been weaker on health-care entitlements鈥攊ncluding, most importantly, Obamacare鈥攖han on any other domestic-policy issue.

In other words, on the major legislative issues of the day, GOP voters are in between Trump and Ryan. A sort of blend of the two men鈥檚 views would pretty closely reflect those of the Republican rank-and-file. Collectively, GOP voters are significantly closer to Trump on immigration, probably about equidistant from the two men on trade, fully in line with Ryan on the need to repeal () Obamacare, and closer to Ryan on the need to reform Medicare to rein in runaway spending.

A glass-half-full version of what a Trump presidency could look like, therefore, is that Trump would pull immigration policy well to the right of where Ryan would want it to be, the two men would moderate each other on trade, and Ryan would pull Trump far to the right on the big-government health-care programs that are centralizing power and bankrupting America. (A glass-half-empty version would entail something closer to a continuation of the unacceptable status quo on all three fronts.)

So perhaps Republican voters knew what they were doing more than the center-right punditry is willing to admit. Or perhaps the glass is really half-empty.