The future of the Republican Party — with or without Donald J. Trump — is weighing heavily on the party’s top elected officials, thought leaders and activists. It’s a topic sure to be dissected once the results on Election Day, November 8, 2016, are tallied. Beyond Trump lays out the possibilities ahead for a political party facing an existential crisis.

When Donald Trump entered the presidential race in June 2015, the Republican Party was divided. By the time he accepted his nomination just over a year later, it had shattered into pieces.

The GOP for years was a diverse but sturdy three-legged stool of security hawks, tax cutters and religious conservatives. Within that coalition, stakeholders might jostle for prominence but generally got along, united by the common goal of winning elections.

Divisions within the party existed before Trump won the 2016 nomination, but were exacerbated in recent years as establishment Republicans battled with conservative populists over a variety of hot-button issues, including immigration. Tactical fights erupted over whether to threaten government shutdowns and how much to compromise with Democrats. Smaller factions within the party, like libertarians, battled to push their policies to the top of the agenda.

Then came Trump. The real estate mogul’s ascent didn’t just catch Republicans by surprise, it went against everything many party stalwarts thought they knew about the GOP and its voters.

Whether or not Trump prevails in November, the GOP is set for a rebuilding process like none in recent memory.

Trump violated party orthodoxy on trade, entitlement reform, money in politics and national security. He exposed a huge portion of the Republican base that either disagreed with party leaders on key issues or didn’t care what they had to say. To some degree, the celebrity candidate challenged the idea that policy proposals even mattered: His own positions were far from consistent; he shifted regularly, even on signature issues; and he scoffed at the need for depth or nuance. The thrice-married candidate’s checkered personal history and crude rhetoric flew in the face of the party’s religious, conservative image. And his appeals to bigotry forced some Republicans to consider whether the left’s portrayal of the GOP as the party of white resentment was more accurate than they had once thought.

“The party of Reagan was the party that had coalitions that worked seamlessly together,” GOP strategist John Feehery said. “What Donald Trump has identified is a party that is literally splitting apart between the donor class and the working class parts of the party.”

Q&A John Feehery Republican strategist At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? A conservative party that looks first to the free market to find solutions to problems that face the country. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? The party is frustrated with the status quo and wants change. It is also profoundly disappointed with globalization. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? We have to understand that the party is much more dissatisfied with globalization than we are prepared to admit. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? The GOP must become a solutions-based party that is in better touch with its constituents on issues like trade and immigration. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? The party must actively work to build better relationships between groups who face the same economic hardships. Instead of seeking to divide people on race and religion, the party should work to find common interests and common ground that can unite these groups in a common cause. Economic hardship is not a white issue or a black issue or a Hispanic issue or an Asian issue. It afflicts every community and we need to be the party of solutions that help to alleviate that hardship.

Whether or not Trump prevails in November, the GOP is set for a rebuilding process like none in recent memory. If he wins, he’ll face a Congress whose leaders have largely distanced themselves from his brand and who oppose much of his agenda. If he loses, his one-of-a-kind candidacy offers each faction of the party a credible argument that its approach would have carried the election instead.

We asked more than a dozen prominent minds in the Republican Party, including Trump supporters and Trump critics, fiscal conservatives and social conservatives, tea party rabble-rousers and veteran establishment hands, to assess the impact of Trump’s emergence and where the party goes from here.

Despite their differences, the conservatives we interviewed described their ideal Republican Party in similar terms, one guided by values like “free enterprise,” “individual responsibility,” “limited government,” “family” and “security.”

How to achieve that ideal was another story. Participants disagreed sharply on the policies that constitute true conservatism, the changes needed to secure its political future, and, above all, what Trump’s emergence meant to them. Was he a malevolent force that needed to be purged? A prophet heralding necessary changes? A freak occurrence with no greater meaning at all? Or some mix of all of the above?

In the course of these conversations, four broad paths emerged, each pointing to different agendas, different messages, different coalitions of voters and a different conception of what it means to be a Republican.

Welcome to Choose Your Own Adventure: Republican Party edition.

Path 1

2

3

4

Path One Trump Takes Over the GOP The current path is the one Trump offers: The Republican Party remade in his image. While Trump’s policies are inconsistent, the broad contours of his vision are clear enough. A Trump Republican Party would champion blue-collar white workers and lean heavily on fear and resentment to excite small donors, recruit volunteers and motivate supporters. Politicians in Trump’s Republican Party would showcase their opposition to illegal immigration on economic, cultural and security grounds while casting suspicion upon Muslims at home and abroad. Most claims of racial inequality would be brushed aside as divisive. Leaders would be unapologetically brash in the face of “political correctness.” A new “America First” foreign policy would push back against free trade agreements, military alliances and the U.S.-led international institutions that enforce these arrangements. The party would table old arguments over shrinking government and reforming entitlements, urging robust government intervention instead to help workers left behind by economic changes. As Liz Mair, an anti-Trump, libertarian-leaning Republican strategist put it, the party under Trump’s leadership is “less about protecting and expanding freedom and liberty and much more about trying to placate angry, working class, predominantly male white voters” with proposals that emphasize “sticking it to people outside their demographic.” Q&A Liz Mair Republican Strategist At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? Historically? In my lifetime, it’s been America’s most viable political vehicle for protecting and indeed expanding freedom and liberty, if a flawed and imperfect vehicle. Going forward? I have no idea. We’ll see. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? In many respects, it hasn’t — I’m something of a cynic. But yes, with Trump as the nominee, the GOP is definitely far less about protecting and expanding freedom and liberty, and much more about trying to placate angry, working class, predominantly male white voters with policy “solutions” that are very unlikely to actually improve their lives but make them feel good about sticking it to people outside their demographic, and quite a bit about kicking the can down the road with regard to actually solving difficult, underlying issues instead of just slapping a Band-Aid on and gearing up for the next election. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? That’s impossible to say without knowing the exact outcome of the general election. My fear is that his rise could cement the idea in some Republicans’ minds that the party has to become more restrictionist and anti-free market where trade and, to a lesser degree, immigration are concerned in order to try to capture his voters — and I hope that doesn’t happen, not least because as this election season has proved time and again, his voters are not gettable by otherwise conservative candidates who simply sound a protectionist note on trade and immigration. Ask Ted Cruz. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? Our congressional leaders need to quit doing quaint procedural maneuvers that get them coverage and credit for being “clever” from congressional reporters, but that do not move the needle or help people who are legitimately struggling in this country. They need to fix the underlying problem in this country, which is too many people feeling like they’re falling behind when the American Dream is supposed to be available to everyone. In some cases, that might mean digging in their heels and being more partisan. In others, it might mean trying to work across the aisle more. We are also obviously going to have a lot of work to do where building, or repairing, relationships with nonwhite, non-male voters are concerned, but that might not be an attainable goal within a four-eight-12 year time frame, depending on how the next few months go. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? Improve their lot economically and not by offering up Band-Aid “solutions” on things like trade or immigration, but figuring out a broader platform that will raise wages — not overall compensation, but actual wages. Drive down health care costs, improve actual health, and make education and training more broadly attainable; then, pass it. Fix the underlying problems, which are not specific to Trump’s voters, but are causing Trump’s voters to rally to him, and others to rally to Democrats. In short, do your job, and win as a result. Carl Paladino Businessman The aristocrats and the elitists in Washington, D.C. — they’re all about themselves. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Mark Peterson/Redux Trump has said his vision for the GOP is a “worker’s party.” In a break from the party’s smaller-government past, he has suggested a massive federal investment in infrastructure to provide jobs directly to struggling areas, not unlike the federal stimulus package President Obama pushed through early in his first term over nearly unanimous GOP opposition. All of these positions challenge the Republican Party’s traditional three-legged stool of social and fiscal conservatism and national security interventionism. In other words, Trump’s most loyal backers have soundly rejected the party’s fundamental orthodoxy. “I saw that [George W. Bush] mentioned in the paper … that he thought this was the end of the Republican Party,” former New York gubernatorial nominee and Trump’s state campaign chair Carl Paladino said. “I certainly hope it is the end of the Republican Party as he knew it.” Q&A Carl Paladino Businessman At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? The Republican Party, having been hijacked after the Reagan years by self-absorbed Washington establishment opportunists who even today seek to be identified by a compliant press as conservatives when in fact they are Republicans in name only, RINOs. They have illustrated repeatedly a lack of conviction and inability to provide a formidable opposition government even with control of both houses of congress. Just two weeks ago Paul Ryan called out Trump for not aligning with Ryan’s conservative principles. That’s the same Paul Ryan who clearly defined himself as a phony hypocrite when, in his first action as Speaker, he led other RINO congressmen into the democrats fold and passed the Trillion dollar wasteful and bloated Obama budget which included the funding of Planned Parenthood’s late term abortions. The Republican party rank and file are redefining what the party will be in the future in this political revolution. It is evolving to once again represent the marginalized working middle class, the backbone of our nation. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? Donald Trump is the personification of the subdued anger with the failed elected class on every level that has been festering in middle America for years. He appeared not only as a fearless leader of men not in any way hesitant to speak and say what the people are thinking but also an intelligent and successful businessman with hard and direct solutions. On the immigration issue the politically correct talked amnesty and split hairs over sealing up the borders. They were shocked upside down that Trump was so brazen as to state that he would build a wall and have the Mexicans pay for it. The cowardly, restrained and limp wristed liberal progressives couldn’t imagine how he could do that. The press and elected leadership, Republican and Democrat, could not comprehend how a business leader with such tough characteristics would confront such a challenge. After a couple of months they learned that Trump is exactly the medicine that the Doctor ordered to restore American values. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? Trump has been very clear on his policy positions on the issues of the day. His stances on the open border and the free trade issues are redefining conservative values from the nonsensical definitions provided by the elites and mainstream press. Who are they to say that our $500 billion trade imbalance with China is a conservative value. How plain stupid is that. The conservatives I know scratch their heads and wonder how anyone can define Trump as other than a conservative. It’s all about our industry elites who benefit from the China’s trade and give us illogical reasons for not messing with our trade pacts. How plain stupid are the press and establishment elites to tell us that temporarily shutting our borders to immigrants who pose a terrorism threat is not what the American people want. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? We are the GOP and we will do what Trump has proposed and the people who elect him want done. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? When you are able to credibly define for me why you think that responsible minorities and women sought by Trump to support him do not appreciate Trumps policies I will be better able to answer your question. I don’t think anyone cares who the present GOP leadership seek to court. As said above we are the new GOP. It’s obvious that you have chosen to define Trump’s support as coming from only blue collar men. If you are really looking to define his support you should come to South Buffalo where 80 percent of the people are white and blue collar middle class democrats. My unsophisticated poll of my neighbors is that at least 75 percent of them will vote for Donald Trump. Paladino himself is a good example of what a post-Trump GOP candidate might look like. A successful businessman, he won the New York Republican nomination for governor in an upset in 2010 despite behavior that included sending racist and pornographic images to an extended email list of friends and reporters. He cratered in the general election, but says he sees a path for the party if it can rack up higher and higher margins with disaffected Democrats in downtrodden places like his hometown of Buffalo. “The Republican Party is already halfway to that change,” Paladino said. “They’re already addressing, exclusively, the middle class, and making it better, and taking them along for the ride.” Several Republicans who spoke to NBC News agreed this transformation would only realistically occur if Trump wins, prompting holdout Republicans to fall in line behind his agenda. “If he loses … he will have proven to be nothing but a flash in the pan and will have little lasting impact,” Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin said. “If he wins, it will prove the Chamber of Commerce-driven elite agenda is dead as a national platform.” Q&A Jenny Beth Martin Co-founder of Tea Party Patriots At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? The Republican Party is the vehicle in our two-party system for conservatives to organize around a set of ideas that inspire and are aimed at ensuring the American people have an option that stands for personal and economic freedom and a debt-free future. When the Republican Party stands clearly and forcefully behind those conservative principles, it wins. When it strays from those core values, it struggles. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? The 2016 Republican nomination process showed there is a massive chasm between the elites and the conservative base of the party. While the elites have been pushing a pro-Chamber of Commerce agenda — amnesty for illegal immigrants, tax cuts for businesses and high net-worth individuals, accommodating Obamacare with tweaks and marginal fixes — the conservative grassroots base has been in revolt. All over the country, in state after state, GOP primary voters made clear their preference for anti-establishment candidates like Donald Trump and Ted Cruz. While the conservative voters who make the Republican Party great have been asking for their leaders to stand for a bold, conservative vision and fight for it, the Washington establishment constantly equivocates and seeks to preserve a status quo that provides them with power at the cost of pursuing our principles. The people were tired of listening to career politicians and their minions tell them why they must compromise their values. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? We won’t know until and unless he wins the general election. If he loses — or is somehow denied the nomination — he will have proven to be nothing but a flash in the pan and will have little lasting impact. If he wins, it will prove the Chamber of Commerce-driven elite agenda is dead as a national platform. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? The GOP needs to be more responsive to and reflective of its conservative grassroots base. The GOP elites need to understand that we, the citizens, loan them power on a temporary basis for the purpose of creating and maintaining a governing infrastructure to secure our rights — no more and no less. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? Tea Party Patriots Yellow Card Agenda is a set of seven significant issues, each of which has 70 percent support from the public: Fundamental pro-growth tax reform, repealing Obamacare, repealing Congress’ special exemption from Obamacare, breaking the link between federal funding and the implementation of Common Core educational mandates, funding and implementing a national biometric entrance/exit visa system, balancing the budget in five years with the Penny Plan, and enacting term limits for Congress. All have broad majority support across all demographic segments: Partisan, ideological, gender, age, income and education. But even some Republicans opposed to Trump’s candidacy suggest the party could be on a path toward Trumpism1 regardless of what happens in November. Some pointed to Europe, where far-right parties have rapidly gained ground touting a similar message on issues like immigration and trade. Just like Trump’s campaign, the political debates in those countries have often pitted elites against populists, older voters against younger voters and white voters against non-white voters. In this context, Trump looks less like an outlier in American politics and more like the product of a global trend. “I suspect that he’s more or less permanently turned the GOP into a European style ‘far-right’ party like the National Front in France or the Party for Freedom in Belgium,” Leon Wolf, editor of the conservative RedState and a fierce Trump critic , said. Q&A Leon Wolf Editor of RedState At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? [I’m] not entirely sure how to answer this question anymore. I will say that it is the current home to some men of decency like Ben Sasse and the last few public officials who believe honestly in shrinking the size and scope of the federal government, like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Rand Paul. As an institution, it at least pays lip service to the idea of opposing the horror of legalized abortion, whereas abortion on demand is now celebrated by both its credible alternatives. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? I personally don’t feel like I identify well with either anymore. Trump entered the scene and my immediate thought was that he was a poorly drawn caricature of what liberals think Republicans believe, but it turns out the liberals were right about at least 40 percent of us. After he got the nomination, the craven manner in which party leadership has hitched its wagon to him in spite of the continually detestable things he says and does has not spoken well of their convictions or their courage. I still believe firmly in the conservative principles that I always have believed in, and it’s a good thing my beliefs are extremely firm, because the urge to run away from any sort of association with many of the people who support Trump — especially the denizens of the internet and social media, where I am professionally forced to spend a lot of time — is nearly overpowering. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? I suspect that he’s more or less permanently turned the GOP into a European style “far right” party like the National Front in France or the Party for Freedom in Belgium. This is something I’ve written about at some length before. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? I’ve no idea. I consider this to be sort of in the “not my problem anymore” realm, which is a good thing because whoever is left to pick up the pieces after this debacle and attempt to assemble a national coalition after what this Trump campaign has wrought had better be a whole lot smarter than I am. I almost think it will be worse if Trump wins. If Trump loses, at least the party will be in a position to make some of the tough decisions that need to be made to ensure long-term viability. If he wins, basically everyone of prominence will be stuck defending the Trump train wreck for four years. We may be looking at decimation of the party on the order of what it was during the World War I-era, if that happens. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? If I recall correctly, Mitt Romney won the white male vote by a greater margin than Reagan did. [Editor’s note: In 1980, Reagan won 56 percent of whites in exit polls to Romney’s 59 percent in 2012. Reagan won 66 percent of whites in his 1984 blowout.] I don’t think it’s possible to run up the score with that demographic any more than Romney did without inevitably causing problems in other demographics that are becoming larger and more politically important, as we are seeing now. Here’s the reality: A lot of the people Trump is appealing to are basically only reachable through lies. Coal jobs are not coming back; coal can’t compete on price with natural gas anymore and even if it could, coal mining requires much less human labor every year. Manufacturing output in America has continued to soar even as manufacturing employment has plummeted — a state of affairs that won’t reverse itself unless someone makes robots illegal (which of course would have a catastrophic inflationary effect on the price of manufactured goods). The jobs these people once had are not coming back and they need new jobs and careers. That’s a hard truth and no one is willing to say it (even Hillary got destroyed for saying it in West Virginia). So we have an endless game of lying to these voters because they punish politicians for telling them the truth. So, in terms of winning their votes, I guess you would want someone who lies to them with panache, as Trump does? In terms of actually solving their problems, that would take a politician that they will never vote for. Trump himself is well aware of this dynamic: He supported the Brexit vote to leave the European Union, which was spearheaded by the nationalist United Kingdom Independence Party, and has regularly cited its winning coalition as a model for his own. “They will soon be calling me Mr. Brexit!” he tweeted in August. John Feehery Republican Strategist What Donald Trump has proven is that you don’t have to be ideologically pure. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Matt Rivera For the party to go down this road, Trump’s presidential run would have to inspire a generation of candidates to take up his playbook on the local, state and federal level. If his voters stay politically engaged and influential figures in talk radio and media outlets like Breitbart continue to embrace their agenda, they could force Republican leaders toward Trumpism with primary threats, just as tea party activists pushed Congress toward rigid conservative doctrine before them. Trump could encourage this himself by continuing to target Republican critics in the press, by purchasing or founding media outlets to spread the Trumpist gospel, or even by running for president again. An early case study might be Paul Nehlen, the Republican challenger to House Speaker Paul Ryan in Wisconsin, who ran a campaign linking himself tightly to Trump and calling for the possible deportation of all Muslims from America. Whatever we do during the Donald Trump era we’ve got to be cognizant an older, whiter, more male party is a party that’s never going to win another presidential election. Nehlen was always a longshot and lost by a wide margin, but future candidates in more favorable districts and states could be more formidable. The same night Nehlen lost, a former talk radio host won an open House primary in Minnesota, despite making shocking remarks about women and slavery. On a national level, it’s not hard to imagine someone like Sarah Palin (a supporter of both Nehlen and Trump) becoming a real threat to win the 2020 nomination on a Trumpist platform. The existing tea party wing of the party could also take on a more Trump-like flavor. Sen. Ted Cruz pointedly refused to support Trump, for example, but he moved toward him during the Republican primary by souring on free trade negotiations, reversing his past support for more legal immigration, endorsing self-deportation for undocumented immigrants and proposing America accept Christian refugees while leaving Muslims behind. Chapter One United States of Trump An inside look at the voters who took over the Republican Party. “It’s no longer the rich, suburban country club party,” said former Sen. Rick Santorum, whose own 2016 run included calls for a decrease in immigration and an increase in the minimum wage. “Whether the party recognizes it or not, it’s going to be reflected in who’s going to do well in our elections.” The challenges to this approach are obvious. The party would be betting its national fortunes on an aging demographic that’s rapidly being eclipsed by a new generation of more diverse voters who are unfamiliar with the country Trump invokes when he says, “Make America Great Again.” “Whatever we do during the Donald Trump Era we’ve got to be cognizant an older, whiter, more male party is a party that’s never going to win another presidential election,” Feehery said. But just because the math on this movement doesn’t add up past 2016, doesn’t mean the party can avoid being taken along for the ride.

Path Two Refined Trumpism As a candidate, Trump repelled many Republican elites even as he attracted millions of disaffected GOP voters. That clash is threatening to tear the party apart this year, but what if there was a way to excite Trump’s voters without alienating everyone else? That’s the path offered by a prominent set of conservative intellectuals who see Trump’s success as proof of their longstanding argument that the party needs to reinvent itself as the champion of the little guy. Their case goes like this: Trump won because he was the one candidate who realized the Republican Party had fallen out of touch with its own voters and ordinary Americans in general. While GOP candidates, donors and activists came together in the past behind a platform of cutting entitlement benefits, slashing taxes for the wealthy, passing trade deals and embracing immigration, many Republican voters were more interested in paying their bills and didn’t see how any of those longstanding party principles helped their day-to-day lives. Opposition to President Obama kept GOP leaders and voters on the same page until 2016, when everyone started looking past Obama’s presidency. That’s when the Republican platform’s rotten foundation collapsed. “Republicanism isn’t that good of a product,” Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute , said. Instead, the party needed to rebuild around “pushing opportunity to the people who need it the most.” Q&A Arthur Brooks President of the American Enterprise Institute This country needs a strong movement that channels the principles of free enterprise, personal responsibility, entrepreneurship and strong American leadership into creative policies. Those ideas are often cast as “conservative” values, but they are really just the core pillars for helping the most people here and everywhere build the best life. They need to be articulated in a way that is inclusive, optimistic and attractive. I’m a political independent, so I’m agnostic about the partisan box those ideas come in. But the Republican Party has found success in the past when it has paired core free enterprise principles with warmhearted, optimistic leadership and a special concern for ordinary people and those on the margins of society. That is a recipe the GOP needs to rediscover. The recessions that follow financial crises often have protracted, sluggish and asymmetrical recoveries — and recent years have been no exception. Many feel that Washington is failing to provide opportunity for them and their children. Leaders need to hear and learn from those worries and frustrations. But real moral leadership means diffusing anxiety with solutions, not simply encouraging and intensifying it for political gain. Divisiveness may offer a short-term payoff, but I’ve seen no evidence it can ever be the basis for lasting victory. Henry Olsen Ethics & Public Policy Center What Donald Trump did was ask different questions. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Mark Peterson/Redux Proponents of this theory, who include prominent “reform conservative” writers like New York Times columnist Ross Douthat and National Review editor Reihan Salam, mostly loathe Trump, especially his appeals to racial prejudice. But they’ve also spent years warning Republicans of a rude awakening if they don’t find ways to address his voters’ concerns about stagnant wages and competition from immigrants and foreign rivals. Douthat has described Trumpism as “reform conservatism’s evil twin” — an unworkable agenda GOP leaders brought upon themselves by ignoring the conservative intellectuals’ think tank-friendly alternative. So how does a candidate win these disaffected Trump supporters? Show they’re willing to stand up to the same donor class that Trump used as his foil. That would mean painful sacrifices for small government activists and the wealthy backers who fund their cause. “Republicans need to be less doctrinally wedded to free market economics, which is not to say turning back on the market, but to say that there are times when intervention is justified to ensure everyone has a fair shake,” Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics & Public Policy Center , told NBC News. Q&A Henry Olsen Ethics & Public Policy Center At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? At its best, the Republican Party represents the aspirations of everyday Americans: Creating a country where everyone can so far as possible, pursue lives of their own choosing which include dignity, comfort and respect. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? Trump’s success showed me that many Republican voters are more concerned with making sure government helps them when they feel pressured than with smaller government or traditional values. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? It’s too soon to say. So much depends on how post-Trump office holders deal with this phenomenon. But it is likely to move it somewhat in the direction of economic protection for lower-skilled workers. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? The GOP needs to do the same thing it needed to do before Trump announced, place itself squarely in favor of problem-solving rather than pursuing chimeric ideological agendas. It will probably need to place more of an effort on solving the problems of women and immigrants than it would otherwise have. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? An agenda that focuses on the dignity of work and the energetic use of government to encourage and support it — including expansion of public subsidy or provision where necessary — should appeal to lower- and moderate-skilled people of all races, ethnicities and genders. In line with that approach, reformers’ suggestions include a more skeptical eye toward immigration, new tax credits to raise working class incomes and an openness to subsidized health insurance and child care. Reformers’ immigration positions are still a far cry from Trump’s. There are no calls for mass deportation of undocumented immigrants or giant walls. The focus instead would be on preventing future illegal immigration and revamping the legal visa system to reduce the number of workers competing with Americans for jobs. “I think the age of mass migration has to come to an end,” David Frum, former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, said. “I think the Republican Party also needs to make its peace with universal health care coverage.” One crucial prescription a number of reformers have named: Abandoning the party’s never-ending quest to slash taxes for the rich. Not only does it undermine its populist credibility — especially while the party is asking voters to endure cuts to Medicare and Social Security — it soaks up money that could go to funding middle-class benefits. David Frum The Atlantic Donald Trump looks like a cartoon of what people think a Republican businessman would be. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Mark Peterson/Redux The hope, reformers say, is that by rallying around a worker-focused economic program while ditching Trump’s bigotry and misogyny, the party could convince minorities, women and young voters to give the GOP a second look. Embracing Trump’s voters carries its own dangers, though. It could turn out that a “reform conservative” candidate is caught in the deadly middle: Too populist on economics to attract support from big donors and ideological conservatives, but too “politically correct” to fire up Trump’s base and attract small donor support. NBC News Decision 2016 The latest news about the 2016 election, including debates, polls, and results. Appealing to voters’ financial bottom line instead of white resentment is a winning strategy if the bottom line was what drove them to support Trump. But what if white resentment was what actually brought them to his rallies? Or what if making offensive statements is a litmus test for blue-collar Republicans that proves a candidate is on their side and not part of the Washington establishment? If that’s the case, reform conservatives run the danger of being outflanked by Trump-like candidates willing to offer voters more populism and more anger. A reformer could promise new investments in infrastructure only to face a candidate who promises double. Another might promise new limits on worker visas only to be met with a promise to build a border moat and fill it with alligators. “The populism always runs to its s***** natural endpoint,” Florida Republican strategist Rick Wilson, a fierce critic of Trump, said. “You can’t satisfy that monster.”

Path Three The Party Establishment Wins If there’s one thing we know about Donald Trump, it’s his professed deep disdain for the political establishment, which has shown him no great love, either. If he loses in November, the Republican establishment, along with its donor class, could claim victory and restore the party to its former image while purging the party of its populist influence. “I just don’t see the GOP adopting [Trump’s] policy positions in the long run,” said Lanhee Chen, a Stanford professor and former top adviser to Mitt Romney . Q&A Lanhee Chen Senior fellow at the Hoover Institution At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? The Republican Party is home to those who believe in economic opportunity, individual responsibility and a strong national defense. It should be a welcoming and conservative coalition of Americans from all ethnicities, socioeconomic backgrounds and geographies. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? I think it’s really emphasized for me the deep frustration with the political establishment present in the Republican voter base. I always knew there was some amount of disaffection, but Trump’s success suggests that it is the dominant strain in our politics today. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? I am not sure that he will have a lasting impact on the platform so much as he will have an impact on the focus of the GOP’s policy efforts and how we talk about and describe those efforts. Trump has, more than any other GOP presidential candidate in recent memory, talked about helping those who have been left behind by the economic changes of the last decade. That’s a good focus to have. Unfortunately, he believes in addressing these needs by opposing free trade, favoring a nativist immigration policy and shying away from reforms that will save and strengthen Medicare and Social Security. I just don’t see the GOP adopting his policy positions in the long run. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? We need to remember the lessons we learned after the 2012 election. The party needs to realize that to be successful in the future, it needs to build greater support amongst populations that are growing in America while taking advantage of the amazing technological advances we’re seeing. The party should double down on its investment in outreach to minority communities, digital operations and data gathering and analysis. At the same time, our candidates and leaders need to emphasize the core values that have made the Republican Party successful in the past — opportunity, liberty and personal responsibility. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? Sadly, some of these differences may be irreconcilable. But the way that we can appeal to the great majority of Americans is for the party to return to first principles. A growing economy benefits every American. And a safe country with strong alliances around the world does the same. Our candidates and leaders have to emphasize these principles and pursue policies consistent with these broad goals — and this will, I believe, naturally appeal to many different constituencies. Following a Trump loss, the donor class would point to the election results as proof that his coalition of working-class, less-educated white men doesn’t spell victory in a general election. They would dismiss the policies that Trump championed, insisting voters don’t support trade restrictions, mass deportations, a Muslim ban or preserving entitlements. “We told you so,” the donor class would argue. And they’d be energized and emboldened to restore the GOP to its former self: A pro-business, anti-tax party, perhaps offering minor concessions for the new generation. “I suspect much of the GOP, like what they used to say about the Bourbons of France, is that they’ll learn nothing and forget nothing,” Erick Erickson, founder of the conservative media site TheResurgent.com , said. Q&A Erick Erickson Founder and editor of The Resurgent At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? At this point it seems to be just a party of lobbyists and Wall Street interests. It should symbolize to me the party of family and personal liberty. But it doesn’t. Today it is more about who can give the most money to shape its policies. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? I don’t think he has changed my conception, but rather reinforced that Republican voters are really angry with the party and at this point are perfectly happy to watch it burn to the ground because of so many broken promises. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? I don’t know that Trump will have a lasting impact on policy. I suspect much of the GOP, like what they used to say about the Bourbons of France, is that they’ll learn nothing and forget nothing. I don’t think Trump’s shift toward support for the minimum wage and protectionism will be viable in the party after he leaves, and I suspect they won’t even be a part of this year’s platform. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? I think the GOP needs to undo a lot of the changes they made in the past election. They were designed to prevent the primaries from dragging out, but Trump was able to take advantage of them to shut out the competition. Institutionally, I think the GOP is going to have to do a better job of connecting with blue-collar voters and explaining how their policies will benefit families. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? I think there are policies the GOP has said it would pursue, but never actually pursued. First, the GOP can actually secure the border. If they talk about it as border security and not just keeping Mexicans out, most people would agree with that. They don’t need to pursue comprehensive plans. Second, the GOP can simplify the tax code and push deregulation from the standpoint of helping small businesses, not big businesses. Third, they can get back to being the responsible, grown-up party on foreign policy and national security. The party of Lincoln must endeavor to behave like the party of Lincoln This post-Trump party would surely try to become more diverse. It would revive key portions of the Republican National Committee’s 2012 “autopsy” and resume its outreach to women and minorities, especially Hispanics, whom Republicans, especially Trump, have turned away. The party would also work to win young voters by softening opposition to social change, especially gay rights. This evolution would begin with immigration reform, and would not include automatic deportation or a concrete wall paid for by the Mexican government. Whit Ayres Republican Consultant The Republican Party needs to make the same changes after this election that it needed to make after the 2012 election. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Mark Peterson/Redux Fred Malek, Republican donor and former Republican administration official for four presidents , argues the GOP must look to its founding to find its future. Q&A Fred Malek Former Republican Administration Official At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? The Republican Party symbolizes the American Dream, backed up by a strong, just, and even handed national defense. Our dream is for any American to have the ability to lift his or her boat in an economic environment that incentivizes the individual to work hard and creatively, relies on the private sector vs. government, and does not burden growth through excessive regulation. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? Trump has not changed my conception in any real way. The fact that he secured 9% of the Republicans eligible to vote in the primaries shows there is a portion of the electorate fed up with the professional political universe. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? I don’t see Trump’s candidacy having a long term impact on the GOP’s policies. We will always favor those policies that incentivize the private sector to create jobs and opportunities and will consistently have a firm and moral approach to our foreign policy. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? The party of Lincoln must endeavor to behave like the party of Lincoln. The only party with two governors of Hispanic descent, two governors of Indian descent, three female governors and the only African-American U.S. senator needs to celebrate the diversity of our country. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? We need to welcome immigrants while preventing illegal immigration, demonstrate tolerance for all, have empathy for those with different views and promote policies that lift all boats. “The party of Lincoln must endeavor to behave like the party of Lincoln,” Malek said. “The only party with two governors of Hispanic descent, two governors of Indian descent, three female governors and the only African-American U.S. senator needs to celebrate the diversity of our country. We need to welcome immigrants while preventing illegal immigration, demonstrate tolerance for all, have empathy for those with different views and promote policies that lift all boats.” The party would still face a long climb out of a very deep hole. Trump’s policy proposals and rhetoric against Hispanics and African-Americans have strained and probably reversed past GOP efforts to woo those voters, panicking donors and the party establishment who know the party’s future depends on expanding beyond its older, white base. “Every candidate for the foreseeable future will be viewed through the prism of Trump by voters. That’s a massive problem, especially since he’s turned off every key demographic the GOP needs to win national elections,” said Evan Siegfried, columnist and author of the newly released book “GOP GPS.” Q&A Evan Siegfried Columnist and Author At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? The GOP symbolizes opportunity for all, individual freedom, progress and limited government. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? Trump’s success hasn’t changed my view of the party. I still love it and will still fight for it. Unfortunately, a plurality of the voters let a stranger and charlatan in our house. Sixty percent of Republican primary voters did not vote for Trump, and Trump only enjoys the support of 64 percent of conservatives per a poll out yesterday (Romney, Bush and [Arizona Sen. John] McCain were in the high 70s to low 80s). We still have a majority-sane base that can be used in the future. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? Forget the platform, which no Republican is bound by, Trump has made it increasingly harder for the party to expand the party. Every candidate for the foreseeable future will be viewed through the prism of Trump by voters. That’s a massive problem, especially since he’s turned off every key demographic the GOP needs to win national elections and that the 2012 autopsy recommended we appeal to. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? We have to make multiple changes (many outlined in my book). Reince [Priebus, the RNC chair] and party leadership need to go (not Ryan, [Senate Majority Leader Mitch] McConnell, etc.) and be replaced with forward-thinking and independent thinkers. They can no longer be taken credibly. We have to drop the social conservative stuff and recognize that many of our policies make millennials think we are a party of the past. Additionally, we need to change the way we market and sell conservatism, too, from a greater digital push to what policies we put forth. Police body cameras, paid family leave and other “liberal” ideas are actually conservative and can appeal to voters, but because they are big issues for Dems, many in the GOP are scared to embrace it. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? See answers to 3 & 4. Also, after the election, there will need to be a massive denunciation of the Trump style and bombast. Leading up to it, we cannot allow the idea that the race is rigged take root in places other than Alex Jones. If blue-collar white men don’t like it, it is understandable, they feel forgotten, but we can’t cut off our nose to spite the face in order to appeal to them at the expense of appealing to everybody else. Trump’s support among the growing population of nonwhite voters is dismal. The nonwhite electorate grew by 2 percent between 2012 and 2016 and now stands at 31 percent, according to a Pew Research survey. And a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found Trump with zero percent support among African-Americans in the battleground state of Ohio, and his support among Latinos is lower than any previous Republican presidential candidate. “If we are going to win national, general elections, we simply must do better with women, African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans,” said Katie Packer, a veteran GOP strategist who helped lead the so-called “Never Trump” movement during the presidential primaries. The autopsy was not a dumb document, it was smart,” said Wilson, the Florida political strategist. “It was dumb that we didn’t listen to it. The party’s 2012 autopsy — officially called The Growth and Opportunity Project — urged a fresh look at immigration reform and outreach to Hispanics as central to the party’s survival. A number of Republicans have also advocated criminal justice reform to build credibility with black voters, something Trump sidesteps while he focuses on “law and order.” “The autopsy was not a dumb document, it was smart,” said Wilson, the Florida political strategist. “It was dumb that we didn’t listen to it.” To embrace the future, the party might also place some aspects of its social conservative agenda on the back burner — especially its focus on stemming the tide of gay rights. The party could continue to hold traditional beliefs without pushing religious freedom bills or restrictive bathroom legislation to the forefront of campaigns. “We have to drop the social conservative stuff and recognize that many of our policies make millennials think we are a party of the past,” Siegfried said. It’s not that proponents of this path don’t want the support of Trump voters. They just don’t think Trump is a true conservative, and that many of his policies that appeal to this group of voters don’t fall in line with Republican ideals. Trump’s protectionist economic policies, in particular, have caused consternation among establishment Republicans, many of whom are business leaders. Ken Blackwell Family Research Council He can’t do worse than Romney did with African-Americans and Latinos. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Matt Rivera “Sadly, some of these differences may be irreconcilable,” Chen said of the economic philosophy Trump and his supporters have embraced. “But the way that we can appeal to the great majority of Americans is for the party to return to first principles. A growing economy benefits every American. And a safe country with strong alliances around the world does the same.” Tony Fratto, who served in the administration of President George W. Bush, said that adopting Trump’s economic policy proposals and the views of his followers “is not sustainable” if the Republican Party is to remain intact. “What you have in that case is a completely incoherent party and it’s not something that can be properly called a national party,” Fratto said. Chapter Two A Party Divided How Donald Trump emerged from decades of GOP tension. The establishment would revive efforts to shrink the federal government and cut taxes, especially for top earners, giving weight back to supply-side economics. To overcome resistance, the newly restored establishment party might have to break the system that produced Trump. That could mean aggressive efforts by GOP donors to fund primary challengers against members who won’t fall in line. Party leaders could try to cut off damaging candidates early, as they did in 2012 when GOP organizations publicly renounced Missouri Senate hopeful Todd Akin over his comments on rape and abortion. Such efforts took place in early August. A Kansas Republican House primary pitted an establishment challenger, Roger Marshall, against incumbent Tim Huelskamp, a tea party champion who had irritated party leaders by turning against them on key votes. Donors like the United States Chamber of Commerce, a pro-business lobbying group, and Chicago Cubs owner Todd Ricketts backed Marshall, who handily defeated Huelskamp. If the party unites by using cash to crush anyone with an outsider streak, it risks acknowledging that a competition of ideas no longer exists. It’s a value that the Republican Party once prided itself on but has lost in the era of President Barack Obama as the party became one of Democratic opposition.. Mair, the anti-Trump Republican strategist, points out that the party has to once again become a party of “solutions.” “Fix the underlying problems, which are not specific to Trump’s voters, but are causing Trump’s voters to rally to him and others to rally to Democrats. In short, do your job, and win as a result,” Mair said.

Path Four The Stalemate It’s become a daily mantra among Trump’s critics on the right: If only we had nominated anyone else, we’d be winning for sure right now. “Hillary Clinton is so weak and vulnerable and had we chosen any other candidate as our standard bearer, we would likely defeat her come November,” Packer, the veteran GOP strategist, said. But if Trump loses, no one faction competing for prominence in the Republican Party gets to claim victory, continuing a years-long stalemate within the party. The establishment wing will claim Trump’s difficulty with minority voters means the party must diversify. The tea party wing will claim Trump’s disgruntled populists were mad that Congress didn’t fight Obama harder. Social conservatives will claim they should have nominated a candidate with pro-life credentials and one marriage, rather than three. In other words, the party will continue its head-on collisions with the same vehicles that crashed against each other in the Obama era, said Fratto, the former Bush administration official. Penny Nance Concerned Women for America I believe our ideas are winning ideas. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Mark Peterson/Redux “I fear because of how screwed up the party is … regardless of what happens we’re coming out as a divided party with unanswered questions for large chunks of the party,” he said. In this scenario, no one group would gain enough power to successfully lead the party. It would remain deeply fractured, with different segments vying for control and angry Trump supporters looming in the background pressing for change. Without one emerging faction as the winner, the agenda on trade, immigration, old-age entitlements and the role of the U.S. in a globalized world would grow even murkier. Congressional leadership would struggle to maintain a working coalition with a platform that goes beyond opposition to a Democratic administration. Olsen, the fellow at the Ethics & Public Policy Center, said that as a result it could take decades for the Republican Party to define itself, yielding Democrats the upper hand for years. “I think it’s highly likely that instead of a debate that could have been roughly settled by 2020, we’re likely to have a much longer and much more difficult debate that could very well include more losses at the presidential level until they get it right,” Olsen said. It’s not just that a Trump loss would fail to settle the party’s pre-existing debates. To many Republicans, Trump’s nomination was a fluke — one that could not be replicated by anyone else and would require few policy concessions to his voters. I think if he loses it won’t have had much of an impact on the party “I think if he loses it won’t have had much of an impact on the party,” Terry Sullivan, who managed Sen. Marco Rubio’s presidential run, said. “He’s a cult of personality; he’s not an ideologue.” To Sullivan, Trump’s supporters weren’t paying much attention to his heretical breaks from longstanding conservative ideas. They were just mad. “Anger is not an ideology,” Sullivan said. Phil Robertson “Duck Dynasty” star If they get ready to boo God out of the Republican Party, I’m leaving with him. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Mark Peterson/Redux Many in the party echo Sullivan, saying they are reluctant to predict major changes in response to Trump without proof there’s a movement beyond the man. It’s not like the party’s current iteration is such a disaster, after all: Republicans have had tremendous success at the state level and currently control the House and Senate. “I think it’s a mistake for the Republican Party to walk away from the fact that we are the majority party in the United States,” said Ken Blackwell, a former Ohio secretary of state and current board member of the Family Research Council and the National Rifle Association. Under this scenario, social conservatives will remain a driving factor in Republican politics and ideology. If Trump, a nonreligious candidate who has wavered on key issues like abortion and appears to embrace some aspects of gay rights, has not driven them from the party, their relevance in a post-Trump party would continue. Penny Nance, president of the conservative group Concerned Women of America, says she is confident that social conservatives will be a leading force within the party. “We are in good shape when it comes to issues of life,” Nance said. “Is this a party realignment? I think that there’s some good coming out of this, but I think there are also some struggles as we find our voice and find new folks coming alongside us.” Another four-year period in the wilderness with no one faction gaining control isn’t necessarily all bad news. A number of Republicans expressed hope that the potential 2020 presidential field might yield greater talent than in 2016, with Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst, Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton and Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner often named as potential stars. But if the GOP’s competing groups are wrong that Trump is a passing fad, they could end up recreating the conditions that allowed him to thrive. The 2020 election could be another divided contest filled with candidates vying for different “lanes,” leaving an opening for a Trump-like candidate to again swoop in. David Bossie Citizens United The establishment doesn’t always win; the grassroots still has power. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Photo by Mark Peterson/Redux A party in stalemate would be most evident in Congress, where policy battles can take place weekly, not just every four years. GOP lawmakers from suburban swing districts looking for compromise and results would knock heads with those from solidly red districts who believe the party needs to take a harder line. David Bossie, president of the conservative group Citizens United and a Trump supporter, described the future of the party simply: “The establishment doesn’t always win; the grassroots still has power.” For some Republicans disaffected by what happened in 2016, a stalemate would be preferable to a turn in Trump’s direction. Some, like Jeb Bush’s top adviser, Sally Bradshaw, who left the GOP over Trump, would likely rejoin the party to which she’s dedicated so many years. Ohio Gov. John Kasich would probably agree to attend his party’s next nominating convention, rather than sitting it out as he did this year. Packer, the Republican strategist, would perhaps no longer wonder what world she lived in. “Donald Trump’s success has made me question some days whether I have a home in this party anymore,” Packer said. “His long pattern of disrespect for women, his mocking of the disabled and prisoners of war, his openly racist comments make me wonder who the people are who believe he is a leader fit to fill the shoes of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan and both George Bushes.” In the end, if the party is to accept its many factions and encourage tolerance between different camps, the next goal could be to broaden the definition of conservatism rather than seek out its purest, most Reaganesque form. “I say, diversify,” Michael Brendan Dougherty, a writer for The Week , said. “Find candidates to run in places where Republicans don’t run well, and give them the freedom to discover how Republicans can represent new constituencies. That may mean the GOP develops a protectionist wing, or a wing dedicated to a certain style of urban planning. So be it. All parties have radicals. Successful parties have moderates, too.” Q&A Michael Brendan Dougherty The Week At its best, what does the Republican Party symbolize to you? I’m not romantic about political parties. At its best, the Republican party is the conservative and integrating force of American politics. It is the party you join when you feel you and your set have “made it” in America, and that you have something to lose. The sense of fragility that has overtaken the middle class in America has been very destabilizing for Republicans. How has Donald Trump’s success changed your conception of the Republican Party and its voters? Trump tended to do a little better in open primaries. I came into this election cycle with a sense that the Republican Party had not ever reckoned with the changing composition of its base voters. Trump more than confirmed this. A diverse set of conservative journalists had been warning about this since the 1990s. There were the paleo-conservative critics, from whom Trump’s campaign now takes some of its cues. There were the Reformist critics like Reihan Salam and Ross Douthat, and then there were the domestic policy neoconservatives like David Frum. I think, in different ways, all of these critics knew that, whatever their personal merits, the ideological and symbolic content of the Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan campaign lacked anything for wage-earning or underemployed whites who, for one reason or another, find they cannot vote for Democrats. In what ways will Trump have a lasting impact on the GOP’s policy platform? It is very hard to know how the blame game shakes out. If he wins, everything becomes uncertain. If he loses, Republicans may attribute his loss to his departures from the Romney-Ryan orthodoxy. It is possible that the Trump phenomenon contains within itself so much racist nonsense, and potential for political failure, that his campaign makes any immigration law enforcement short of open borders and amnesty radioactive. On the other hand, I think anxiety about immigration is here to stay. So we may get the worst of all worlds in the GOP, where the party responds to Trump by doubling down on the “autopsy” diagnosis that helped to spur the Trump rebellion. My one hope is that the one truly touching line from Trump’s convention speech, about “the forgotten men and women of our country … who work hard but no longer have a voice,” will become a lodestar for imagining the future of the GOP. What changes do you think the GOP needs to make after this election? The party needs to do what Chuck Schumer did for Democrats in 2006, but on a much grander scale and a sustained basis. That is, the party and the conservative movement need to create the breathing room for regional flavors of Republicanism to truly flourish. Instead of seeking the “true conservative” in every race, put the emphasis on finding team players who will represent Republicans in their region. Sometimes that is affluent white retirees in the Northeast, sometimes that is the hillbilly vote. Buckle in and do it. The party needs to find the institutional authority to limit the number of presidential candidates to around a half-dozen. Another idea would be to try to do something like institute instant runoff voting in multicandidate Republican primaries. Ideologically, I think the Republican Party needs to find an economic agenda for rebuilding a middle class that seems ever more like a fragile proletariat. They need to stop making promises they can’t keep, or that they are loathe to keep (like repealing the Affordable Care Act in toto). And they need to prove to populists that they are serious about implementing a normal country’s immigration system, one that is lawful and discriminates in favor of the country’s current needs. Like Canada’s or Australia’s. The party will need to elect a solid foreign policy president to begin repairing the damage there. My sense is people don’t necessarily admire the way Democrats handle foreign policy. But after George W. Bush, they fear the way Republicans do. That’s a tremendous loss for the Republican party. How does the GOP appeal to voters most excited by Trump, such as blue-collar white men, without alienating other groups that the GOP has tried to court, like minorities and women? One way to look at the Republican party is that it has completely ghettoized itself in American exurbia. Just, culturally, it feels like Republican officeholders are comfortable only in their SUVs when driving between the Cheesecake Factory, their megamansions and an affluent megachurch. They only make occasional sorties into major cities to meet donors. Republicans are so far behind with reaching out to minorities because they are practically absent from urban politics altogether. They have the same problem in coal country, or the depressed parts of the Rust Belt. They just seem totally alien. And when they come in and rigidly preach conservative political doctrine as a kind of American orthodoxy, they are simply not dealing with human beings as they are. And again, when they are out of the megamansion, megamall context, those political doctrines seem like a kind of scam, a cloak for the narrow interests of exurbia. So, I say, diversify. Find candidates to run in places where Republicans don’t run well and give them the freedom to discover how Republicans can represent new constituencies. That may mean the GOP develops a protectionist wing, or a wing dedicated to a certain style of urban planning. So be it. All parties have radicals. Successful parties have moderates, too. (FWIW, I consider myself a “moderate nationalist”)