Word.

This is a much more foundational and important point about modern conservatism than most people give it credit for:

Reagan himself won the GOP nomination and the presidency after embracing a supply-side economic doctrine that made it easy to be conservative, offering tax cuts that paid for themselves without forcing any real decisions about the role of the federal government in national life.

This doctrine has largely been discredited economically, but it's had a sensational and still-vibrant run as the political underpinning of Republican fiscal policies that promise to square every circle, and invite every corruption of traditional conservative principles.

This connects to my Tapped post from earlier today explaining why the Republican Party can't change its domestic policies. Supply Side economics is great for the rich who fund the conservative movement, but its debunked claims of cross-society benefits and economic magic rendered it appealing to Joe Public. That's the trick. The average voter lacks a degree in policy analysis, so if you can just repeat the Big Lie often enough, you can develop support among constituencies certain to face direct harm from your agenda.

Eventually, however, the jig ends. And for Republicans, that happened during Bush 41. Bush 43's compassionate conservatism was an attempt to recapture the magic, but now that the rabbit in the hat turned out to be dead, you're seeing a natural reordering. That's why certain conservatives -- like Brooks, Douthat, and Salam -- are trying to think of the next step, a real compassionate conservatism. But it's a fool's errand -- the party can never take it. Supply side economics was a pretty package meant to obscure the same old Gilded Age policy proposals. The reason it proved necessary is that the GOP's robber-barons have no intention of writing fairer policy. Now the ribbon's off, the wrapping's been shredded, and Republicans have turned to culture and national security to remain afloat. The question is how long those two will remain dominant, as eventually domestic issues will return and the critical financial core of the party will never accept actual progressivism in the policy planks.