So please explain to the class about that “Come to Jesus” moment.
From the Preface of his book, IT WAS ALL A LIE: “I keep getting it wrong. A lot of people were wrong about Donald Trump in 2016, but it’s difficult to find anyone more wrong than me.”
In his recent post at Resolute Square, Project Lincoln’s Stuart Stevens explains:
I was wrong. I could not conceive of the Republican Party becoming the greatest internal threat to democracy since the Civil War. But that is the reality of this moment. That is the challenge we face if the American experiment is to survive this decade.
I realize bringing up the “Chicken Little” accusation might be a little unrefined, but holy cow dude … “the greatest threat to democracy since the Civil War?”
I guess we shouldn’t be too hard on Stuart because it’s not really an original thought on his part. It’s a common Democrat and Liberal media talking point against Republicans and by extension, Donald Trump, to use the “Civil War” hyperbole…
• Joe Biden No. 1: “GOP voting bills are the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War.”
• Joe Biden No.2: “The Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol is the worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War.”
• Jerry Nadler: “Trump is the greatest threat to the democratic system and to the constitutional government since the Civil War.”
• Maxine Waters: “Trump has proven himself to be the greatest threat to our democracy since the Civil War.”
• New York Times: “Mar-a-Lago documents represent the greatest crisis in American Democracy since the Civil War.”
• Group of historians who met with Biden: “They compared the threat facing America to the era leading up to the Civil War.”
So … nice try Stuart, but no cigar.
Meanwhile, back to our guest…
While I was focused on defeating Democrats, an evil was building in the Republican Party, an anti-democratic, pro-autocracy movement based in white grievance. I should have recognized this for what it was, but I was too focused on winning each election to think about losing a country. I looked the other way.
I helped create this crisis, and I must use the skills and dark arts I had mastered building the modern Republican Party to destroy what it has become.
Dark arts!
Somewhere in a smoke-filled room at a Lincoln Project strategy meeting a while back, someone noticed that their OLD AND BUSTED version of Trump resistance was losing some traction. Stevens reveals the results of that meeting:
That’s why a group of us came together to launch Resolute Square. We can’t wait for billionaires or corporate media to fight back. We must do it ourselves. We believed in this mission so much that we dug deep into our pockets to fund the launch of Resolute Square. The response has been overwhelmingly positive, drawing a diverse collection of voices driven by the core values of democracy versus autocracy.
“We dug deep into our pockets…”
Problem solved … “New Package – Same Great Taste,” as the hucksters in the cereal business would tell us. And they spent $14.95 for a new domain name.
It’s worth mentioning that Stuart Stevens is not a politician. His attachment to the political scene is not nearly the same as someone like Tulsi Gabbard who represented Hawaii’s 2nd Congressional District from 2013 to 2021 as a Democrat. Her “Come to Jesus” moment has been well articulated:
I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are hostile to people of faith & spirituality, demonize the police & protect criminals at the expense of law-abiding Americans, believe in open borders, weaponize the national security state to go after political opponents, and above all, dragging us ever closer to nuclear war.
This is a rather stark contrast to the somewhat shallow reasons Stuart Stevens has claimed for casting aside the Republican Party, a move by he and others primarily centered on the arrival of Donald Trump.
Switching political parties is nothing new. Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren was a Republican until 1996. She said she was a part of the GOP because she felt they were the “best party for business.”
Hillary Clinton, one of the most prominent faces in the Democratic party, was also a Republican who campaigned for Richard Nixon as a teenager. At Wellesley College, she was elected president of the Young Republicans Club. Her transition came about because of her views on civil rights and the Vietnam War.
But back to Stuart Stevens…
Let’s take a casual archeological dig through the news and see what we can find about this former literary jack of all trades who, after the devastating loss of the Mitt Romney campaign in 2012 where he was chief strategist, left him “disoriented and dismayed” … he took a year off from politics, spending time biking across the United States.
**A bike tour for a year**
Just how did he get his start in the political arena? In the New Republic we find the short version:
Stevens’s political career began as a bit of a lark. In the mid-’70s, he interned in the congressional office of Thad Cochran and became friendly with Cochran’s chief of staff, Jon Hinson. When Hinson later ran for Congress, he enlisted Stevens to make his ads. Other than the internship, Stevens had little political experience to speak of. But his years of wandering included a stint in film school, and Hinson figured he knew his way around a camera.
Even as he ascended the top ranks of consultants, this unrefined vibe was the key to Stevens’s success. Unlike most political veterans, he didn’t bog himself down in ideology or lingo. His clients came off more like network TV characters than C-SPAN stiffs.
Above all, Stevens’s dabbler sensibility gave him an enviable range of skills. He was not so much an ad man as a creative consultant with a filmmaker’s eye and a screenwriter’s sense of pace. Stevens is, for example, quick to adopt film techniques—like the Steadicam, a tool he imported from TV sports coverage to shoot subjects in motion.
If you’re so inclined, you’ll find the full article by Noam Scheiber a revealing study with a very interesting observation about Stuart Stevens’s ability to “change horses midstream:”
…it’s not impossible to imagine Stevens stirring up some mischief a few years down the line. Sometime after the campaign ends, there will be another highly charged, partisan event: an HBO docudrama revealing the gory details behind George W. Bush’s domestic spying efforts, based on the Pulitzer Prize-winning work of Eric Lichtblau and James Risen, two New York Times reporters. When the film debuts, it will almost certainly dredge up all the anger and bitterness of the Bush years. The former president and those closest to him will undoubtedly dislike it. And when the credits roll, they may discover something a bit surprising: The screenwriter for the project is one Stuart Stevens—the very same Stuart Stevens who had so much fun helping to elect Bush in the first place.
At this point it’s worth focusing on Steven’s abilities in the political prediction game as he swings and misses regarding a Trump Presidency in this Washingon Post 2015 article:
So where’s Donald Trump going to win? Iowa? Don’t think so. Given the cultural conservatism of Iowa Republican primary voters, a guy who has been married three times, bankrupt four, is in the gambling business and stumbles over a question about asking God for forgiveness is not a good fit.
Trump as a nominee is an obvious disaster for Republicans, which is just one more reason he won’t be the nominee.
Do we have a clue yet about Stevens’ opening statement in this piece, “I keep getting it wrong?” It can be concisely summed up in this interview with New York magazine, in September 2015:
It’s not going to happen. For Donald Trump to win, everything we know about politics has to be wrong. And I don’t think it is.
So much for “political strategist.” Who the heck was hiring him?
We can conclude that a misjudgment of the political winds surrounding the election of Donald Trump is certainly worth a bit of forgiveness, as was demonstrated by a wide variety of pundits and political observers in 2016.
It’s also worth noting that Stuart Stevens, to this point in our story, has not been accused of “jumping ship” in the political ecosystem of Republican politics. But neither can it be said from any rigorous investigation of his personal policies that he is a “Principled Conservative.” He just grew up in the neighborhood and found some work.
We might have a clue, though, in this 2016 interview on CNN’s “Reliable Sources” with Brian Stelter that the “real” Stuart Stevens is beginning to reveal itself:
STUART STEVENS: Well, I think you have to separate Steve Bannon from Breitbart, from conservative media. I mean Breitbart is, they’re in the hate business. They’re a bunch of nuts.
STELTER: You say the hate business, that is very strong language.
STEVENS: Well, read Breitbart. That’s what they are. There’s this whole alt-right thing, which I think is just re-packaged racism trying to put a better name on it. And xenophobia.
STELTER: And to be clear, you are a Republican strategist, you ran Romney’s campaign four years ago, and you’re sitting here saying that one of the most popular web sites for Republican readers is a hate machine?
STEVENS: Yeah. I mean read it.
Just the appearance on Stelter’s show might be that “clue” we are looking for about Stuart’s impending transition to the “dark side.” Is it not interesting that you cannot find any appearances featuring Stevens on Right-leaning news programs, not to mention any articles in Conservative publications? He is usually found in #Liberal playgrounds like MSNBC (his favorite), Morning Joe, CNN, VOX, and others.
Getting a clearer picture yet?
Next thing you know, Stuart will be showing up on the Joy Reid show!
Oh, wait…
Also, if ever there was a news source that is squarely in the “Right Wing” spectrum that strongly aligns with conservative, traditional, or right-wing thought and/or policy agendas, it is Breitbart News.
I’m pretty sure we can conclude that it’s not just about “Trump.” I’m getting the idea he doesn’t like the Conservative side of the aisle at all.
At this point, we could actually “conclude” this post on Stevens’s “I keep getting it wrong” theme, but we’ll just insert a short quote from Ann Coulter summarizing his political analysis creds (incidentally, Ann’s quote shows up on that “hate site,” Breitbart):
…there isn’t a mammal on the North American landmass who knows less about winning presidential elections than Stuart Stevens.
Ouch … gonna need to put an ice pack on that one Stuart.
Let’s proceed with a video confession where Stevens actually admits his work wasn’t about “principles.”
HIS WORDS: “I thought a lot more about winning elections than saving the country.” WATCH:
Time and time again in researching Stuart Stevens, the opening sentence of 95% of the articles begins with “Stuart Stevens, former chief strategist to Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign,” or something to that effect. That’s not what we would call a dynamic bio establishing credibility for the Conservative cause.
Much like the rest of the grifters at The Lincoln Project, Stuart Stevens never was a “participant” conservative. He merely grew up in that part of town and found he could make a good living with his talents. You can try this little experiment on your own and see what you can find about any Conservative principles promoted by Mr. Stevens: Open Google, type in these two phrases … “Stuart Stevens” and “principled conservative” (with quotes), and click “Search.” Good luck with that.
Another of the Lincoln Project wonks is Tara Setmayer who also claimed her “Conservative principles are fully in tact (SIC).” I did some digging on that claim here.
Stevens and his fellow hypocrites might claim they are aligned with some version of Conservative principles, but that conversation has been subtly changed to “Pro-Democracy Defenders,” a definition they just can’t seem to define. The fact is, they are completely aligned with #Democrats and #Liberalism because that’s where the $$$ are to keep food on the table. It began with their open hostility to Donald Trump whereby they duped big-money anti-Trumpers to open up their checkbooks and pour in millions of dollars … all the while carefully avoiding any mention of trying to “preserve” the political principles of Conservatism. The latest version of Project Lincoln, aka Resolute Square, is merely the same grift with new packaging, aimed now at Conservative media. Stuart explains…
@stuartpstevens @ResoluteSquare @TheRickWilson @reedgalen @JoeTrippi Love, follow, support, believe and appreciate you all 💪🏼 Quick Q, how is this diff fr Lincoln Project? Thanks 🍓
Here are more tweets about Resolute Square. You wouldn’t be wrong if you concluded that these folks always seem to be “against” something, but hardly ever “for” something…
That Trippi Show isn’t taking a break for the holidays. Listen as @JoeTrippi talks to @dellavolpe about the rising political engagement of younger voters, and why it’s a dire threat to the GOP. https://t.co/TqIDCBaCzu
You’re not alone in feeling rage at the situation we’re in. Anger about the lack of respect for humanity and the communities we’re a part of doesn’t have to be bottled up. It can fuel action, as @mayaonstage knows well. https://t.co/bOlAZJXdwh
And not to toot my own horn, but let’s conclude with a couple of my own tweets for an in-depth analysis of “Grifters Project 2.0:”
Autocracy has a simple structure: Power comes from the top through a close circle. As @trygveolson reminds us, the GOP leadership isn’t exactly close to Trump’s circle. https://t.co/Hr5fDR9vIg
Stay tuned … there’s a lot more fun ahead, and I’m not even asking for $5 bucks a month like this bozo👇!
YEAH, I SAID IT … YOU’RE A BOZO🤡.
Mark Levin would be so proud of me (if you listen to his show, you’ll understand.)