To appear on stage in the first Republican presidential debate in August, a candidate has to jump through a few hoops.
You need at least 1% in a series of national polls and at least 40,000 donors to your campaign.
Which makes sense!
You also need to sign a loyalty pledge that says you will support the eventual Republican nominee.
Which is a joke. It’s utterly unenforceable and already irrelevant.
Consider what the candidates have said about the pledge in just the last few days.
Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson has said he will do what’s necessary to appear in the debate. But he also told POLITICO recently that “I’m not going to vote for [Donald Trump] if he’s a convicted felon. If he’s convicted of espionage, I’m not going to vote for him.”1
Then there’s former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who said this about the Republican National Committee’s loyalty pledge: “I'll be on the debate stage, and I will take the pledge that the RNC puts in front of me just as seriously as Donald Trump did eight years ago.”
Which means he won’t abide by the pledge.
If you think back to that 2016 race, the candidates were asked in a debate if they would pledge to support the eventual nominee. Every one said they would — except Trump.
“I would have to respect the person,” he explained.
That answer began a back and forth between Trump and the RNC that culminated with the billionaire business staging a September 2015 signing ceremony in which he agreed to support the eventual nominee.
“The best way for the Republicans to win is if I win the nomination and go directly against whoever they happen to put up,” Trump said at the time. “And for that reason, I have signed the pledge. So I will be totally pledging my allegiance to the Republican Party and for the conservative principles for which it stands.”
You’ll note there that Trump was essentially saying he signed the loyalty pledge because he was going to be the nominee and he wanted to ensure that everyone else in the field would back him. Which isn’t at all the same thing as saying that if you lose you will pledge to support the person who won.
As you might have guessed from that Trump statement, he never had any real plan to adhere to the pledge. By the end of March 2016, Trump had publicly abandoned it.
Asked by CNN’s Anderson Cooper whether he still planned to support the nominee, Trump responded: "No, I don't anymore. No, we'll see who it is.”
His penalty for that apostasy? Absolutely nothing!
Fast forward to this race.
Trump was asked In February whether he would commit to backing whoever the party nominated. His response? “It would depend. It would have to depend on who the nominee was.”
Which is a long way of saying: No.
That should serve as a reminder to all of Trump’s Republican opponents that loyalty is a one-way street for the former president. He expects it of you but never feels as though he needs to reciprocate.
The problem for everyone not named Trump in the race is that they need to be on that debate stage in August. Debates are the best way for a little known candidate to build momentum (and raise money). One good (or bad) debate performance can change the trajectory of a race — sometimes permanently.2
Trump is immune from that need. He is already the best known candidate in the race and its clear frontrunner.
And, he’s already shown a willingness to skip a debate that didn’t suit him (in Iowa in 2016). He’s signaling that this time around he may not appear at the first several debates.
“I see that everybody is talking about the Republican Debates, but nobody got my approval, or the approval of the Trump Campaign, before announcing them,” Trump said via his Truth Social website earlier in the spring.
Standing in front of several hundred supporters in a New England state that was a springboard for his election in 2016, Mr. Trump said that he held a commanding polling advantage in the 2024 Republican primary, months before any voting would begin….
…He said that giving his G.O.P. rivals, like Gov. Ron DeSantis, an opening on a debate stage made no sense.
“Why would you do that?” he told the crowd at a DoubleTree hotel in Manchester.
The truth Trump knows is that he is playing by a whole different set of rules than the other people running for the nomination. A debate without Trump is barely a debate. The RNC needs him FAR more than he needs the RNC.
Which means Trump is never going to sign some sort of loyalty pledge. (And, even if he did, you should never believe he would stick to it.)
All of which places his Republican rivals in a bind. Signing the pledge is their entrance to a spotlight and a stage they badly need. But, you know you are dealing with a bad-faith actor in Trump who won’t show you the same loyalty you are showing him.
The best course is the one being charted by Christie. Sign the pledge knowing that it’s utterly meaningless. And then do exactly what you need to do — regardless of what that piece of paper says.
You know Trump will do the same.
Hutchinson actively petitioned the Republican National Committee to change the loyalty pledge to exempt supporting a convicted felon. The RNC shut him down.
Christie’s slam of Marco Rubio in New Hampshire in 2016 stalled the Florida Senator’s momentum badly. Tim Pawlenty’s unwillingness to go after Mitt Romney directly in 2012 effectively ended his campaign.
"Hutchinson actively petitioned the Republican National Committee to change the loyalty pledge to exempt supporting a convicted felon. The RNC shut him down."
Is there really any need to say anything else about the GOPers of 2023?
I know I mentioned this before, but three of the candidates who raised their hand at that debate (Jeb!, Cruz, Kasich) refused to support Trump when he became the nominee.
I am curious what the GOP's motivation for this whole pledge is. To show harmony? But everyone knows it's a work.
I'm glad you wrote this, Chris, the absurdity here has been driving me crazy.