We are in the midst of one of our more interesting and dangerous political times as a practicing republic. There seems to be no end to vague theories or embellished opinions about how we arrived here or to explain the presence of Donald Trump in the middle of it all.

My semi-attempt at clarifying the matter is simple-minded and comes from being born of a simple mind. But as I have observed before, just because a solution (or explanation) is simple does mean that it is easy. In fact, often the simplest, most fundamental approach is the hardest to accept by many. And even harder to implement.

Much of the positive and negative reaction to Trump’s arrival and presence of the political stage has been assigned to his personality. Despite the unavoidable distraction (in most cases) of his personality, Trump’s presidency (and the reaction to it) are a direct result of policies; it certainly has nothing to do with racism, white nationalism, Russian collusion or any number of other elements run up the media flagpole as soon as the last one fails. Trump does not hold his approval numbers because of his personality or imagined collusion. He holds them and actually grows them because of policy; policy which has been wanting and ignored by both parties, each for their own reasons.

I said before that Donald Trump: a political candidate was born of the failure of the GOP to embrace the Tea Party. If this completely grassroots movement had been honestly dealt with by the elites of the Republican Party, the GOP would have established itself in an almost unshakable place of power. But the Tea Party itself was born of not just the coming excesses of Obama but failures of the GOP to actually implement policy. It was the GOP that ran up record debt and turned its back on Swiss-cheese borders before Obama even had his short and uneventful time in the Senate. Before Obama began his assault on our military power and his dismal leadership from behind, it was a Republican administration that put faith in an almost directionless nation-building effort.

The election of Tea Party candidates and the turning of both houses of Congress was a cry, a demand, for actual policy. But these changes only brought more excuses from the establishment types. Those newly elected Tea Party-backed candidates either quickly slipped into the D.C. mode of things or were publically isolated of the party elites.

It is my contention that the real hope for actual policy progress was what made the Trump campaign a success. Those who had mounted sincere efforts to make the policy changes through the regular processes had been marginalized by both the GOP and the media. The “system” had fought back against them. They, in fact, were resented by the GOP establishment. The lack of acceptance of the few who remained on course for those policy changes caused them to be seen as ineffective in their efforts.

Despite a large field of possible GOP presidential candidates who began the race for the nomination, there were few who could have honestly been seen as strong possibilities for actually pushing the full field of policy offensives needed. The truth is, that at first, I only saw one. And he was even more worrisome to the party elite and the media than was Trump, at the time. They still considered Trump to be a passing phenomenon that would soon play itself out. And even if he did prevail to get the nomination by some weird turn of fate, he would surely lose. Their positions and the “system” (or “swamp” if you will) would be intact and they could still dance around the policy issues they had managed to always promise but never deliver on.

Ted Cruz might have been better versed and truthfully at the time more dedicated to actually implementation of the needed policy but a frustrated, lied to and disillusioned set of “every-day” voters saw him marginalized and left standing almost alone as he tried to rally a lukewarm party to actually back up one of their most basic campaign promises. The grit to fight both Washington and the media from the “outside” had appeal to these voters. There was a hope for action on policy.

It mattered little that everyone probably understood that Mexico wasn’t really going to end up paying for “the wall.” The exact details behind the tough, over-the-top talk of a natural promoter wasn’t the issue. The issue was that the policy would be dealt with and that a wall would actually be pushed and border enforcement would actually happen. The talk of Mexico’s funding was a signal of determination to carry through policy more than details of construction.

Trump’s saber rattling tariff talk does not sit well with me and I would prefer a clear, directional endorsement of free-market philosophy. But at the same time, I understand the over-the-top bargaining style of a semi-honest horse trader. And I see the chips falling into a more open and even-footed trade around the world. Mexico is played against Canada, China sees a chance of having to defend a fairly weak currency, Germany bends and things really do drift toward a more free market, a goal never quite realized but hopefully constantly moved toward.

Despite what many view as crudeness, vulgarity and civic brutishness, what we finally have is an aggressive, effective president in regard to conservative principles. Policy is how principles are realized. If the Trump presidency is to be judged at this juncture strictly on a constitutional basis and on conservative policy, it is one of only two clear succcesses since Coolidge.

We have never had so aggressive assault on the liberal hold on our courts; there have been 60 federal judges appointed and confirmed, including Justice Gorsuch but also 33 district judges and 26 seats on courts of appeals.

There has been a genuine attack on the over-regulation of a blotted administration state, and this clear signal has been every bit as responsible for the economical surge were are experiencing as the tax cuts which need to be broadened to include everyone.

Any sustained or growing support for Trump has been because of policy and its results. But this has been policy long-preached about by GOP standard bearers and, yes, those oh-so smart and proper members of NeverTrumpers. It is the success of those policies long promised that are reshaping what was a tired but content GOP. By being aggressive in those policies, it can actually be a “working class” (I hate that term!) party. The results of these policies are the answer to the left’s practice of hiding their true beliefs and goals behind different “coalitions” of a divided citizenry.

Principle does not know color, class and gender. The real way in which an individual’s principles are truly known is through their actions. The real way for a government’s (or party’s) principles can be known is through its alive, active, on-the-ground policy.

The so-called political revolt of 2016 was about policy and only about personality as far as how that personality might actually be able to put that policy into action. But this policy revolt has been seen as more of a “peasant’s revolt” by elites of BOTH parties, the media and all who fail to see that theorizing about policy is not nearly as important as putting it into action.

Therefore, it is important for those who value those policies to realize that the real target of those from both the “left” and “right” who would be either quietly or loudly excited to see Trump’s scalp hanging on someone’s (anyone’s) lodge pole is not Trump himself. In the end, that target is the people and the policies themselves. That is who will be harmed if that orange scalp-lock is lifted.

There certainly can be a nicer and even quieter way of doing the same thing; Reagan showed that. But the hard truth is that of all the seventeen or so potential presidential candidates who paraded before us two years ago, there are only two who we can honestly believe would have been so committed to pushing policy on such a broad scale. And I now have come to believe that the one most capable of doing it, at this time, was elected.

This hardly means I might even like spending time around him. This hardly means that I will not continue to call out what I consider terrible failures (like not vetoing that damn spending bill). I will hardly completely trust anyone living in a political situation.; they need both constant reminding and constant critical observation. This hardly means that I believe he can sit and clearly explain conservatism. But one of the best explanation of conservatism (Americanism) is the every-day results it can reap in a free society. For that to happen policy has to be practiced.

We still need leaders who can explain American principles with clarity. And perhaps we will have one in the White House one day again. But the party we have looked to for advancing those principles has too long been content to pursue them only nominally and comfortably. There may well be some who would be more “comfortable” to the elite and NeverTrumpers, but this critical juncture was created by those who were comfortable with watering down policy and the growth of government. Liberty was not intended to be comfortable. And the constant battle for it certainly wasn’t.

Another important view of Trump is to realize that since it is actually conservative (true American) policy that is the issue, he is only the beginning first steps of a restoration. He is only the instrument used to begin. It is a stone to be built on. The destruction of the Trump presidency in its present form is a step backward and a victory that will entrench “the swamp”, “deep state” and political class even more than they were before. Because they will not have defeated Trump. They will have once again slapped down the people’s demand for policy that reflects the Founding and not political comfort.