| Get Jonathan Bernstein's newsletter every morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe.
Jared Kushner has an idea: He wants a Republican Party platform so short that it can be printed on a "single card that fits in people's pockets." This isn't a new concept, but there's a reason that platforms have become bloated over time and why this isn't a fight worth winning. If there's one thing pundits will tell you about party platforms, it's that they don't matter. That's half correct. As electioneering tools, platforms are in fact about as unimportant as can be. After all, the only people who care about them are activists, organized interest groups and other party actors, all of whom are almost certain to vote for the party ticket in November. The media might pay attention to platform fights, but that's mostly because there's very little election news in the weeks leading up to the party conventions. Once the conventions are over, the media will move on and the platforms will be forgotten. Would that change if the platforms were postcard-sized? Of course not. General-election spending is overrated to begin with. The idea that the perfect ad, perfect speech or perfect platform can make much of a difference just isn't backed up by data. But there's more to party platforms than that. Presidential promises matter because politicians, including presidents, try to keep the promises they make during campaigns. Granted, those pledges are not only expressed through the formal adoption of a platform. But the nomination process, including the drafting and adoption of the platform, generally winds up reflecting the agenda and political positions of the party as a whole. So it's not a bad guide to what the party will do if it has the chance. That also means that those activists and organized groups and other party actors who fight over the platform tend to care a whole lot about those disputes, even if most of us ignore them or forget about them immediately. This is why the platforms are so bloated, and why Kushner, a senior adviser to the president, is unlikely to advance his plan. It's true that (unlike in 2016) President Donald Trump's campaign will be in total control of the Republican convention and all its committees, including the platform committee. It will probably get what it wants. But when push comes to shove, hollowing out the platform is certain to anger a lot of Republican party actors. And the gain from doing so is … just about nothing. After all, if Kushner thinks that a one-page campaign document is a great electioneering tool, he doesn't need to upend the platform to create one; he can print up whatever he wants and call it whatever he wants. He can even call his placard "the Republican Party Platform"; it's not as if the party would sue him over it. This is separate from the question of whether campaign staffers will try to eliminate platform items they don't like or don't think will play well in the election. They may try to do so, and certainly may succeed. But it's one thing to take on a small number of specific groups over their platform requests; it's another to take on every group in the party that cares about their platform language — especially with no tangible gain. Sure, it may happen anyway. But it's a fight that wouldn't make any sense to win. 1. Maggie Shum at Mischiefs of Faction on threats to democracy in Hong Kong. 2. James J. Cameron at the Monkey Cage on the Open Skies Treaty. 3. My Bloomberg Opinion colleague Narayana Kocherlakota on why there's no tradeoff between public health and the economy. 4. Harry Enten looks at the general election horse-race polling. 5. And Helene Cooper on a failure to achieve diversity in U.S. military leadership.
Get Early Returns every morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe. Also subscribe to Bloomberg All Access and get much, much more. You'll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, the Bloomberg Open and the Bloomberg Close. | 
Post a Comment