January 14, 2025 - 8:00pm

Today’s confirmation hearing of Donald Trump’s Defense pick Pete Hegseth revealed the limits of Manichaean politics, positioning the machine in opposition to those raging against it. Democrats, however, don’t have the upper hand in this dynamic — and they keep forgetting why.

Perhaps the most instructive moment came when Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin pushed back on a line of questioning from Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine, who interrogated Hegseth about his reported heavy drinking and adultery. “How many senators have shown up drunk to vote at night?” Mullin exclaimed. “How many senators have gotten a divorce for cheating?”

This represents the hearing — and perhaps the theme of American politics right now — in a nutshell. Why? Because Mullin is absolutely correct, but his defence of Hegseth isn’t a vindication of the nominee either. That is to say: both sides have a point, but neither has an answer. While Kaine, Kirsten Gillibrand, Mark Kelly and other Democrats wax sanctimonious about character and qualifications, their feigned concern appears to the public like a breathless defence of a broken system.

Republicans inveighing against drunken senators and military drag shows are right on those counts, and the public knows it. But, equally, Democratic efforts to frame Hegseth as an outsider are exactly what Trump’s base — and therefore Republicans — want.

This is the trap in which the country finds itself locked. The system is in need of disruption, but not every disruptor is qualified and not every defence of the system is wrong. Unfortunately for Democrats, though, the public is so desperate for change that people are now more than willing to err on the side of the disruptors than the status quo. The party’s challenge is to question its opponents without becoming tied to a system which isn’t fit for purpose.

This is exactly why Republicans won’t waver on Hegseth. It’s highly likely that, behind closed doors, senators such as Joni Ernst of Iowa remain concerned about some of Hegseth’s background, whether it’s his pledge to upend the Pentagon bureaucracy, his lack of faithfulness to women, or his dearth of large-scale management experience. But Trump has forced the GOP to reckon with institutional distrust, so Republicans are at least more willing to publicly back attacks on institutions. That still sounds crazy to the Beltway establishment, even though it sounds like common sense everywhere else.

Indeed, Ernst was subject to an intense public and private pressure campaign for appearing to hesitate after Hegseth’s nomination. After her pivot, the entire party increasingly projected total unity on every nominee. Fellow picks Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will surely receive substantive questions from some Republicans. There are unknown variables that could derail their confirmations but, for now, they’re barrelling ahead with the party’s support while Democrats struggle to find room for bipartisanship.

Hegseth’s hearing does not bode well for Democrats. It’s unlikely most Americans will base future votes on this grilling, but if the party’s strategy at the hearing reflects its general blueprint after the second election of Trump, it has a serious problem. It’s not easy to question disruptions without defending broken systems, but it’s possible. That’s not what Democrats did today.

Now, they face weeks of scenarios in which they’ll face the spotlight while questioning Gabbard, Kennedy, Russ Vought and Kash Patel. Their approach to Hegseth suggests Democrats are set to perform poorly. They will be forced to defend intelligence agencies, Big Pharma, and the federal bureaucracy as they seek to undermine critics who are largely correct in their diagnoses of the problems, even if their proposed solutions are much more controversial.


Emily Jashinsky is UnHerd‘s Washington D.C. Correspondent.

emilyjashinsky