The Trump Precursor

Clichés are sometimes unavoidable (hindsight is 20/20), but then so is history—it provides clarity when obfuscation is the order of the day. It seems fitting to say that in some respects we have been here before. Earlier, it was with one who some say was a pioneer and in some respects a forerunner to 45—Patrick Joseph Buchanan.

The author, adviser to Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, and TV commentator pursued a political agenda that still resonates today among conservative American minds. 

High on his list of priorities for America was a moratorium on unlimited immigration, including a wall along its southern border. He sought to rescind unfair trade agreements and reinvigorate U.S. manufacturing. Buchanan cautioned Americans against foreign interventions and warned that American culture was slipping away. He decried as un-American a “rigged” political system with a voice which produced a groundswell, shaking Republican elites. And he was denounced (at the time) by the future 45th president of the United States—Donald J. Trump. 

In 1999, the Reform Party in America had just been created from what remained of Ross Perot’s two efforts for the White House. Pat Buchanan was about to campaign under that aegis for his third presidential run in a decade. Contrary to his ’92 and ’96 bids, Buchanan arrived for his 1999 presidential campaign as a serious contender. It was assumed he’d give “the second Bush” a serious run. 

But the Republicans were putting together something much stronger than what Buchanan had experienced before. It quickly became apparent: the contest was being orchestrated against him.

Sound familiar?

Buchanan realized his dilemma. He could surrender, like others before him; he could, against all odds, wage a principled but “rigged” battle against the second Bush. Or he could embrace America’s newest electoral entity—the Reform Party.

“The day of the outsider is over in the Beltway parties,” Buchanan said. 

The money men have seen to that. Never again will our political establishment permit a dissident to come as close to capturing a nomination as we did in 1996. They have rearranged the primary schedules and rigged the game to protect the party favorites.

Buchanan’s new book at the time was met with both enthusiasm and no small degree of trepidation. A Republic, Not an Empire amounted to a concerted exposition against foreign entanglements—especially military interventions. The “year 1989 was the American moment,” he writes, “but such moments never last.” Buchanan adds, “It is time to let go of empire.” He castigated the establishment (including the military-industrial complex) by reconsidering America’s past military ventures. Buchanan showed that “America’s latest commitments were a dramatic break with the most cherished and prudent traditions of American foreign policy. Washington’s Farewell Address was front and center in this story.”

The political commentator turned savvy politician fiercely resisted the Washington establishment by challenging not only the elites of the Republican Party but the scion of a former president from its ranks. He captured the fear and frustration of the latter, couching his 1992 campaign as “a culture war…a struggle for the soul of America.” But he also garnered the attention and wrath of a former president and his son, who feared that the adage “like father like son” would eventuate politically.

It has been rumored that within the Bush family itself an uneasiness existed—if Perot cost the father a second term, would Buchanan now deny the son his first?

His solution to America’s problems would be the basis for three back-to-back runs for the White House. America, he said, needs a “new nationalism” that focuses on “forgotten Americans” left behind by unfair trade agreements, detrimental immigration policies, and foreign policy military incursions. The three-time presidential hopeful argued that “with the collapse of the Soviet empire, Europe, Japan, and South Korea were now more than capable of providing for their own defense.” America should no longer carry the burden of their defense.

The logic of Buchanan’s political ideology voiced in ’92, ’96, and ’02 can be seen (although not consciously subscribed to by Trump or his advisers) as something of a framework for the former president’s successful campaign against Hillary Clinton. As was attempted with Donald Trump in the run-up to 2016, Buchanan was marginalized as a fringe character for rejecting Republican orthodoxy on trade, immigration, and interventionism. The logic of Buchanan’s political ideology voiced in ’92, ’96, and ’02 can be seen as something of a framework for the former president’s successful campaign against Hillary Clinton. Tweet This

But, in spite of not making it to the White House, perhaps Buchanan did accomplish something else. He could have in some way damaged the veneer of the political establishment in Washington. And this may very well have enabled the uniquely self-confident and much stronger candidate, Donald Trump—in a different political climate—to take on the system Buchanan had 25 years earlier. 

The ideas which Buchanan employed were and remain a function of his political ideology: libertarian, noninterventionist, contra open-border immigration, antiestablishment, against unfair trade practices. 

In a like manner, the former president articulates his vision for America in ways that may strike a chord with the past, but that’s only because things haven’t changed much. The system doesn’t permit that. And the issues which need addressing are similar to those of the past.

The political elite continue to be spoken of with contempt, as fools or stooges subservient to elites rather than the good people who elected them. China is today like the Japan of the past—not to be trusted in trade deals or other ways. And the call for Americans to “take back America” from those who care only for themselves—and not America or Americans—continues to ring true.

Today, the former president has a consistent, well-articulated position and passion for the above concerns—not because of Pat Buchanan but because the 45th President of the United States has been in the position of power, knows the political intrigues of the “Deep State,” has seen the “backdoor” maneuvering in the “District,” and understands what is (and is not) in America’s best interest. 

Pat Buchanan, now 85, looks back on a rich life, replete with extraordinary experiences that for all its significance (and there is much to commend it) some have said is at risk of being forgotten—but that was before Donald John Trump became the 45th President of the United States.

Pat Buchanan now views Donald Trump as “the future of the Republican Party.”

The now-retired writer had this to say about the former president: “Trump is sui generis, unlike any candidate of recent times. And his success is attributable not only to his stance on issues, but to his persona, his defiance of political correctness…charging in frontally where others refuse to tread…”

This writer’s hope and prayer is more laconic—that Donald J. Trump can execute his nationalist American agenda—especially over an opposition composed of a media-establishment complement determined to destroy him; and if one considers recent events, perhaps even his mortal demise. Can the former president surmount the disadvantage to American manufacturing due to poor trade agreements, deal with the reality of millions of illegal immigrants continuing to pour across the border, and foster an economy to replenish trillions of dollars squandered on regime change and short-sighted globalist political agendas? Well, “experts” have said no to his chances before—look at what happened. And now, here we are, again.