Meanwhile, the political class has responded to Trump by relying evermore on the established order he has disrupted. When Trump rose in the polls, the other candidates attacked each other, to set up a one-on-one with Trump. As the field winnowed, politicos corralled their resources to run millions in attack ads against him. When Trump built a delegate lead, they dug deep into the RNC rules, trying to identify a path by which Trump could be stopped from acquiring enough delegates. All of this was to no discernible effect: The anti-Trump forces were consistently playing defense against the insurgent, relying on a conventional playbook that had stood them in good stead for generations. Trump plowed right through their defenses.
Ironically, Trump is now hoping that the political class remains stubbornly committed to one of its oldest conventions: that an independent candidate cannot win the presidency, that it is foolish to try, and so the only thing left is to acquiesce to Trump.
If the shoe were on the other foot, would Trump give up? Of course not. He’d defy this seemingly inviolable principle and forge ahead. And who knows? Maybe he’d win. If his candidacy teaches us anything, it should be that the conventional rules of politics apply . . . until they no longer do. Electoral history is littered with examples—the contests of 1824, 1860, 1896, 1912, 1932, 1952, 1980, and 1992 tell the same story: When the old rules stop working, surprising things can happen.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member