The spirit of '96 - New Hampshire presidential primary - Capital Scene

National Review, March 11, 1996 by Kate O'Beirne, Rich Lowry, Ramesh Ponnuru

AT A RALLY two days before the New Hampshire primary Pat Buchanan took the podium in a hotel ballroom flanked by siblings, nieces, and nephews -- blood relatives there to enjoy his 'conservatism of the heart.' The crowd chanted 'We want Pat! No more GATT!' as their candidate lit into the media and the Washington establishment. 'When George Will started yapping at me like a little poodle,' Buchanan told gleeful supporters, 'I had to take the newspaper and roll it up and hit him with it.' NAFTA, the World Trade Organization, the United Nations all took their licks. But one target escaped with only a few glancing blows: President Clinton. The political establishment the Buchanan Brigades are most concerned with toppling is the GOP.

George Will got off easy. Buchanan actually promised to skewer the 'knights and barons' of the Republican party with 'pitchforks' wielded by the 'peasants' he's leading in revolt. The night of his victory, Buchanan emphasized a win for 'a brand-new bold conservatism,' that would take on 'transnational corporations that have no loyalty to our country,' before making the obligatory pledge to take back the White House. 'We know what they're going to do to us,' Buchanan warned the crowd. 'The establishment is coming together. The fax machines and the phones are buzzing in Washington right now.' In the days leading up to the primary Buchanan supporters were edgy, nervous that their candidate's rightful place as leader of the party would somehow be stolen away. Even in victory the feeling was still there: Pat v. the GOP.

If the Buchanan victory was stunning, it had also been prepared for him by the very establishment he reviles. Republicans still haven't come to terms with the rising influence of social conservatives in the party. They have left a host of cultural issues to be exploited by an insurgent, from immigration to affirmative action to abortion. If the primary season is any indication, these voters will no longer be satisfied with party leaders who offer no more than occasional lip service to the issues that concern them.

Buchanan is right about the battle he faces: if he continues to score victories, the party establishment will try to block him by uniting around someone else. The party isn't comfortable with his views, and it thinks he would lose humiliatingly to Clinton in November. Don't try to convince his supporters of that. Mike Hammond, Buchanan's New Hampshire chairman, dismisses talk of a Buchanan loss in November rivaling the 1964 GOP defeat. 'Goldwater was not adept at communicating a message. Pat Buchanan is a pro,' he asserts.

The dismissive talk about Buchanan can even be an asset. The Mileses, a retired couple, become more enthused about 'Pat' the more the despised 'Washington media' oppose him. Mrs. Miles declares, 'If the Republican party doesn't support Pat, I'll vote for Clinton, I mean that.' Despite his supporters loyalty, Buchanan almost certainly can't win the nomination outright in a two-man race. So Dole and Alexander are now in a wrestling match to become the candidate who can absorb Buchanan's legitimate issues while remaining acceptable to the majority of the party that recoils from him.

Buchanan's eventual rival will have to reckon with the surprising depth of his victory. Those who have tried to explain it away as an irrational spasm by anxious voters should look again. Buchanan won among the 43 per cent of voters making between $15-50,000 a year. The $50-75,000 vote split evenly among Alexander, Buchanan, and Dole. Buchanan only starts to lag among those making more than $75,000 (who backed Dole). Buchanan did as well among people saying their financial prospects are looking better as he did among those saying they were looking the same or worse. Education played a similar role to income: high-school graduates and voters with some college education backed Buchanan, college graduates split three ways, and only post-graduates rejected Buchanan.

THE pundits were right, however, about the importance of religious conservatives to Buchanan. They were only 17 per cent of New Hampshire voters, but a majority supported him. If self-described members of the Religious Right had not voted, Buchanan would have placed third. But just as important as Buchanan's social conservatism is the fact that he has convictions at all. Asked which characteristics of the candidates influenced their votes, more voters (a quarter of them) cited 'standing up for his beliefs' than any other quality. Buchanan won a majority of them.

If the substance of Buchanan's positions appeals to the sort of people who show up to hear his speeches in hotel ballrooms -- hooting at every reference to the New World Order -- the mere fact that he is willing to stand up for them accounts for his appeal among a wider public. It makes him the anti-politician, the repository of all the stand-up virtues the Washington politicians lack. The candidate's charm and campaigning skills -- nobody evinces more sheer joy at being on the campaign trail than Buchanan -- shouldn't be underestimated. His campaign aides are able to laugh, sincerely, at jokes they must have heard dozens of times before. And Buchanan himself can't repress chuckles in the midst of some of his harshest jeremiads.