Iowa shows conservatism is leading over Trumpism

The reigning idiocy of the political season is the incessant tossing around of “establishment,” an epithet now descending into meaninglessness. Its most recent abuse is by Donald Trump supporters rationalizing his Iowa defeat with the following consolation: If you tally up Trump and Ted Cruz (and throw in Ben Carson), a whopping 60 percent of the vote is anti-establishment!

So what? The threat to the GOP posed by the Trump insurgency is not that he’s anti-establishment. It’s that he’s not conservative. A Trump primary victory would convulse the Republican Party, fracture the con- servative movement and undermine the GOP’s identity and role as the country’s conservative party.

There’s nothing wrong with challenging the so-called establishment. If by establishment you mean the careerists, the lobbyists and the sold-out cynics, a good poke, even a major purge, is well-deserved.

That’s not the problem with Trump. The problem is his eclectic populism. Cruz may be anti-establishment but he’s a principled conservative, while Trump has no coherent political philosophy at all. His platform is all persona — the wonders that will emanate from his self-proclaimed strength, brilliance, money, his very yugeness.

Cruz does not lack for self-confidence. And he wraps himself in anti-establishment rhetoric. He reasonably calculates that his hard-edged conservatism sells best when presented not as pristine ideology but as a revolt against entrenched interests.

To imagine, however, that his railing against “the Washington cartel” makes him a Trumpian brother-in-arms is to mistake tactics for strategy, style for substance. To be sure, it’s a misperception Cruz himself encouraged throughout 2015. But that’s yesterday’s story.

The story since January is of a bromance blown up, clearing away the anti-establishment veneer and allowing their polit- ical differences to finally emerge.

The Iowa results clarified the dynamic of the Republican race. There are only three candidates in the race and each represents a different politics. The result is a three-way fight between Trump’s personalized strongman populism and two flavors of conservatism — Marco Rubio’s more mainstream version and Cruz’s more uncompromising version.

We can now read the Iowa results as they affect the Republican future. Trumpian populism got 24 percent, conservatism (Rubio plus Cruz) got 51 percent. There will be a spirited contest between the two conservatives over who has the better chance of winning the general election. But whatever the piques and preferences of various “establishment” party leaders, there’s no denying that either Rubio or Cruz would retain the GOP’s fundamental ideological identity. Trump would not.

Getting thumped in Iowa does not mean that Trump is done. He’s on favorable ground in New Hampshire and leads in practically every other state.

What Iowa confirms is that whatever beating the “establishment” takes during this campaign, Republicans are choosing conservatism over Trumpian populism by 2 to 1. Which means their chances of survival as the party of Reagan are very good.