We’ve had an election, with conservatives disappointed at the lack of a wave, and are now in the middle of recriminations. Did the establishment Republicans spend too much money in Alaska and fail to pick up winnable seats? Did Mr. Trump selfishly hold on to funds he raised rather than help the outside candidates he helped nominate? Did Mr. Trump’s insistence that Republican nominees bend the knee and campaign on stolen elections in the past cost elections even broader than his own candidates by further damaging the Republican brand and enabling Mr. Biden to push an outlandish idea that if Republicans win it’s the end of democracy? Is the Republican Party still the party of Trump, or is in the midst of a transition to somewhere else? DeSantis? Kemp? Sununu? Does America first mean America only? Is Ukraine’s cause against the Soviets Russians just and worthy of our support? Do we still believe in the Reagan doctrine of supporting with arms those willing to die on the battlefield in defense of their freedom against totalitarian oppressors? Few would defend Russia’s aggression (although shockingly some seem to blame Ukraine for “egging them on”), but many “conservatives” believe that Ukraine is so corrupt that we simply should stay out. Let Putin have it, he cares more about than we do. What does it mean to be a conservative?

I think you can all see that the debates rage on, and not just at this point in history. We’ve always had ongoing contests for conservatism. Mr. Trump accelerated the change in tone, but he was not the first. For many my age, Mr. Reagan was the epitome of what it meant to be a conservative, but even he operationally did not always follow his principles (e.g., allowed the debt to explode, restricted trade in some instances). So what does it mean to be a conservative? And where are we going? Fellow Berean Mark Caleb Smith is trying to help our students understand and process this critical question through a series of speakers on What is Conservatism? this year at Cedarville. We’ve already had Matthew Continetti earlier this month, and tonight we get to hear from Steve Forbes, thanks to generous support from the Young America’s Foundation. And since tonight’s focus is on the future of economic conservatism, I get the privilege of being his host and moderate the discussion.

One of the things I’ll comment on in my introduction is that winning is not everything; how you compete and what you compete for is far more important. Politically, Mr. Forbes never had a likely chance in either his 1996 or 2000 campaigns for president. But he was an articulator of great ideas, and great ideas are always more powerful and outlast their vocal proponents. In both elections, Mr. Forbes’ steady articulation of a supply side focus kept the Republican Party following Reagan’s legacy, as other candidates (e.g. Bob Dole) were forced to adopt more pro-free market, low tax policies than they individually preferred. Further, Mr. Forbes, then as now, had to argue for free markets and free trade within the Republican Party, as Pat Buchanan embraced many of the nationalistic/managed trade ideas that are now promoted by Mr. Trump and other conservatives. As you can understand, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Yet unlike many candidates today, Mr. Forbes made the party better, even when he wasn’t the party’s eventual nominee.

If you’re in the area and want to hear about the future of economic conservatism in America, Cedarville University will be a great place to be as we host Steve Forbes tonight.