The problem, however, is that Cheney’s insistence that the election was secure is not the only thing that separates her from her colleagues. She is clearly at odds with modern Republican thinking on both foreign and domestic policy issues. That — not her unwillingness to be Trump’s lap dog — is what should trouble Republican members. The withdrawal from Afghanistan is one such item. Cheney has attacked President Biden’s decision, calling it a huge propaganda victory for the Taliban and al-Qaeda. That would have been a near-unanimous opinion among Republicans as recently as 2015, when Islamist terrorism seemed to be the nation’s serious foreign threat. But that is no longer the case. Most Republicans now rightly see China as a more dangerous foe, and many are willing to cede Afghanistan to a minor set of foes to concentrate our efforts on the bigger threat. Cheney’s mind-set seems to be stuck back in 2003, when U.S. power was preeminent and the United States did not face a serious threat from a large state actor. Cheney’s views on domestic policy are also antique. She recently criticized a memo from the head of the House Republican Study Committee, Indiana Rep. Jim Banks, who said the GOP should cement itself as a “Working-Class Party.” The memo advocated some pretty mild ideas, such as limiting illegal immigration and maintaining trade restrictions on China as ways to increase jobs and wages for working-class Americans. Cheney, however, reportedly described it as neo-Marxist during a Congressional Institute call, sources familiar with the matter told Politico. This is an example of George W. Bush-era globalism — precisely the views that majorities of Republicans now reject. How can she lead a party whose views she largely disagrees with?