Are Republicans a party of ideology or pragmatism?

After the end of the 2016 Republican race for a nominee for president, when both Ted Cruz and John Kasich suspended their campaigns, I heard numerous GOP heavyweights lamenting what happened.

Members of the now humiliated National Review GOP 'intellectual” class had demanded that Donald Trump stop his campaign because he would cause serious damage to the GOP. They were apparently oblivious to the fact that nothing hurt the party more than a couple of 'elitenicks” who, on a cruise to Alaska, had 'discovered” Sarah Palin and foisted her on John McCain.

Iowa Fourth District Rep. Steve King was interviewed by WHO radio talk show stand-in host Jeff Angelo the day after the Cruz implosion. He waxed poetic about the need for 'principled movement conservatives” to retake the party. Presumably there also are unprincipled conservatives and, of course, those who are not conservative.

The point both seemed to miss when it comes to presidential elections - where there is no gerrymandering - is that in the United States, we have always had two kinds of political parties: ideological and pragmatic.

Ideological parties always have been 'principled,” by which we mean parties that have a fixed set of moral, social and economic standards. These are considered 'fundamental” and therefore immutable. Any concession on these, any 'bending” of the fundamentals is unacceptable.

One example of an ideological party is the Socialist Party that has been firmly anchored in the same position on income distribution, state intervention, heavily regulated capitalism, and other principles. Notice that the socialists never have won an election. The reason is that the party refuses to move in the direction where American voters are located. That would be abandoning the very reason for its existence.

The second type of party is the pragmatic, which has only one objective, and that is to win elections. And remember that winning elections is about positioning itself where the biggest cluster of voters stands on a whole range of issues.

For much of political history, the Democrats and the Republicans have been pragmatic, victory-oriented organizations. When they forget the 'Iron Law” of pragmatism and move away from the ”mainstream” and instead concoct top-down positions concocted by the party elites or a leader, they lose elections.

The two most clear and drastic examples of this organizational amnesia are Sen. George McGovern's candidacy and the leftward shift of the Democrats and Arizona Republican Barry Goldwater's rightward shift.

Both of these were 'principled” efforts to take a 'pure” position and hold to it in disregard of the preferences of voters. The results were historic trouncings and a victory by the other party. Remember that there is nothing wrong with high principles. They may indeed be admirable. However, if you want to win elections you've gotta position yourself where the largest number of voters stand.

Let me give you the classic example of a pragmatic position. Bill Clinton identified the issues and what positions Americans favored and he moved the Democratic Party to those positions with the adjustments of the 'New Democrats,” of which he was the advocate. Clinton got elected twice, of course, also partly because a third-party candidate sucked away voters from his opponents in the GOP.

In 2016, the principled Republican who took positions consistent with GOP 'values” was Ted Cruz, as Rep. King has made abundantly clear. Trump, however, is not a 'principled conservative;” he is a pragmatist, appealing to a segment of the voters participating in GOP events, enough at least to now be the presumed candidate of the party.

Trump sniffed out issues that a large swath of voters seem to hold, such as criticizing Pres. George W. Bush/Dick Cheney and the Republican adventures in Iraq, concern about illegal immigration, and job losses to globalization.

We don't know where Trump will be moving as he marches out of the caucuses and primary environments into the battlefield of the general election. However, we do know that the GOP is in many respects frozen in a place that no longer might contain the majority of American voters. It has neglected Hispanic/Latino voters, women, low-income blue collar voters, and young voters, who are a growing segment of the 'votership.”

On the other hand, we also will see whether the Democrats shift too far to the left for Americans to stomach.

In other words, this year is a great case study of the complicated dynamics between ideological and pragmatic politics.

' Steffen Schmidt is professor of political science at Iowa State University. Comments: steffenschmidt2005@gmail.com