Can we disagree? Party purity, the Trump way | R. Bruce Anderson

Former U.S. President Donald Trump arrives in Atlanta on April 10 for a campaign fundraising event.
Former U.S. President Donald Trump arrives in Atlanta on April 10 for a campaign fundraising event.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

I was startled out of my peaceful morning coffee ritual last week by a quick look at the New York Times.

They were reporting a truly peculiar invasion of the usual reality: someone, a Republican of some standing, was disagreeing with Donald TrumpLindsey Graham, the senior senator from South Carolina and a staunch “right to life” advocate, had dared to take issue with Mr. Trump’s “nuanced” pronouncement on abortion.

Graham, after a period of relative sanity following the Jan. 6 debacle, had returned to the sheepfold of GOP moguls blindly shuffling in lockstep behind their fearless leader, “pooh-poohing” his countless felony charges and misdemeanor civil actions and trudging with purpose toward 2024.

Trump had earlier announced that he would not be backing a nationwide abortion ban of any sort, leaving the issue “up to the states” to resolve. Graham took issue with this, gently, hoping out loud that Trump might change his mind.

The hammer came down almost immediately, with Trump via “Truth Social” (his collapsing social media portal) and through surrogates elsewhere.

“Many Good Republicans lost Elections because of this Issue, and people like Lindsey Graham, that are unrelenting, are handing Democrats their dream of the House, Senate, and perhaps even the Presidency," he (electronically) shrieked.

He could be right, of course — there is a lot of noise on left and right about abortion rights being the “easy issue” of 2024 — but that’s not the point, here. Graham has been one of the former president’s strongest supporters and the most willing and faithful of the Trump sycophant class, and was far from unpleasant about his disagreement with Trump, but he was rung like a rusty triangle all the same.

Laurel Lee, the U.S. Congresswoman from Florida's 15th district, is serving out her first term and is clearly a shoe-in for a second run. Or was.

Her history is impressive: a lawyer at Carlton Fields in 2003, she rose rapidly on the public service track — first as a public defender, then as assistant U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Florida. She advanced by appointment (and was easily re-elected) to a judgeship on the Hillsborough County Circuit Court in 2013.

Citizens taking the initiative: It's political, but is it partisan? | R. Bruce Anderson

In 2019, Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed her Florida secretary of state – and here, apparently, her troubles may have begun. Her ties to DeSantis were strong, not surprisingly, and she ran for the open congressional seat in the redrawn 15th district in 2022 with DeSantis’ strong support. Her connections to DeSantis were ones of mutual respect and appreciation, and she endorsed his run for the presidency.

Uh oh.

Lee would never be my own first choice for the U.S. Congress, but she has demonstrated that she is a solid, thinking, relatively independent — though very conservative — “workhorse” member and a loyal Republican. She’s a good fit for her constituency, and has no skeletons in her closet.

Except for that endorsement.

A deal-killer, according to Trump.

At the end of March, he took to “Truth Social” and blared: “Any great MAGA Republicans looking to run against Laurel Lee in Florida’s 15th Congressional District? IF SO, PLEASE STEP FORWARD!”

Democrats worry about the damage Trump’s erratic behavior may be having on the upcoming election, but increasingly I’m wondering whether perhaps his “anti-campaign” campaign is doing more damage to his own party.

R. Bruce Anderson
R. Bruce Anderson

Going after the “other side” for areas of controversy and disagreement is fair game in any campaign – it is critically important to point out the differences between your gang and the other gang at every opportunity (especially when there are only two gangs). But quashing any deviation among people in your own gang, demanding blind obedience from all, regardless of geographical differences, strategic differences and minor ideological differences, is plain short-sighted.

Let’s face it: If you would rather lose a critical congressional seat than allow for a little divergence, you may, in fact, be “handing Democrats their dream of the House, Senate, and perhaps even the Presidency.”

R. Bruce Anderson is the Dr. Sarah D. and L. Kirk McKay, Jr. Endowed Chair in American History, Government, and Civics and Miller Distinguished Professor of Political Science at Florida Southern College. He is also a columnist for The Ledger and political consultant and on-air commentator for WLKF Radio in Lakeland.

This article originally appeared on The Ledger: Trump's insistence on blind obedience could hinder party | Anderson