Politico reports:
Ari Fleischer, one of the co-authors of the [2013] Republican autopsy report that recommended a more inclusive party, said: “The manner in which Trump has campaigned is just the opposite of the recommendations we made. We’ll know on Election Day whether we were right or he was right. . . . If he loses, I strongly suspect it will be because of everything we warned about.”
The autopsy was right about some things, such as the party’s technological deficiencies and its need to reach out to nonwhites. But it was wrong about comprehensive immigration reform. Leaving aside its merits as policy, it was entirely predictable that pushing it would split the party. And the autopsy had nothing to say about economics. Its implicit theory was that if Republicans cleared away some distractions—crazy candidates like Todd Akin, its reputation for being hostile to Hispanics, too conservative a message on social issues—voters would see its terrific economic ideas clearly.
Trump won the primaries in part because of this blind spot. Maybe the authors shouldn’t be patting themselves on the back for their prescience.
Revisiting the Autopsy