Top Dog Conservative In House Putting Together Post-Trump Republican Party
Jim Banks, one of the most influential leaders in the House conservative caucus, has taken it upon himself to try and plot a course for the future of the Republican Party in a post-Trump era, should the election be certified in favor of Joe Biden rather than the president.
Part of this new future for the GOP involves de-emphasizing President Trump while adopting much of his populist agenda with traditional conservative ideology, creating a sort of hybrid platform that he believes has the power to win national elections.
“The Trump agenda was what was popular — not Trump the man,” Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana, incoming chairman of the Republican Study Committee, told the Washington Examiner in an interview. “As it appears more and more likely that Trump will not be in the White House and we will begin the post-Trump era, our party has to begin a conversation of what we look like moving forward. No one is having that conversation. I want to lead it.”
The RSC focuses on writing legislation and, over the years, has been a springboard for prominent Republicans such as Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, a leader of the House Freedom Caucus, and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana. Banks assumes command of the group in January.
The 41-year-old congressman and military veteran views Trump’s loss to President-elect Joe Biden as a failure of personality, not policy, pointing to Republican gains in Congress as proof the commander in chief’s legislative portfolio resonates. Banks wants to keep what worked, pairing popular elements of Trump populism with a fresh slate of reforms rooted in pre-Trump conservative principles that address healthcare, deficit reduction, and other thorny political issues.
“No one in the conservative movement is having the conversation about how we bring Bush compassionate conservatives and marry them with Trump populists — the party of Reagan with the party of Trump,” the congressman said. “How do we fold all that together into a winning party, a winning message, a winning agenda?”
With the vast majority of the country seeming to fully support the agenda of President Trump, while not necessarily supporting the man himself, Banks might be on to something.
Perhaps a lot of folks love the policies that Trump pushed and his ability to fight back against the insanity of the mainstream media, but still found him personally unappealing.
I think that’s a bit ridiculous, seeing as how what a man does is more important than what he says or how he says it, but people will be people I suppose.