Joe Walsh's Trump-lite presidency challenge is doomed before it's even begun

Imagine if Joe Walsh had admitted his own racism while properly apologizing to those he's offended with his racist tweets. Instead, his campaign already feels like a missed opportunity

In an op-ed for the New York Times, former congressman and conservative radio host Joe Walsh described President Trump as “a racial arsonist who encourages bigotry and xenophobia to rouse his base and advance his electoral prospects.”

For this reason and many others outlined, Walsh argued that Trump needed a primary challenge. Days later, he announced that he himself would run against Trump – claiming in one interview that he was doing so with the intention "to make the moral case against him." Walsh is not wrong in his assessment of Trump’s political shtick and he is right to say that someone ought to indeed challenge the amoral president on the basis of his character as much as his unfitness for the job he stumbled his way into.

Yet, many wonder whether or not Walsh – who has long trafficked in various strains of bigotry for professional gain – is the person to try and make such a case. Of course, he’s already started trying to do damage control with respect to his own antics in order to avoid being branded and subsequently dismissed as an attention seeking hypocrite.

In an interview with CNN's Erica Hill on The Lead, Walsh was asked about the time he claimed former President Obama was Muslim was recently as 2016 in tweets. Walsh claimed "there was nothing derogatory meant by" but apologized for his comments all the same, saying it was "wrong." Walsh says he’s running to make the moral case against President Trump, but believes we’re all dumb enough to believe that he meant no ill towards Obama by claiming he was lying about his religion?

Meanwhile, if you've seen Walsh on Twitter, you know he has a long track record of tweeting out various strains of prejudice – particularly about black people and Muslims.

Walsh was asked about this in a separate interview on MSNBC’s Deadline White House, hosted by my favorite disgruntled former Republican Nicolle Wallace. One of Wallace’s panelists, Game Change author and television host John Heilemann, acknowledged Walsh’s apologies, but pressed him about other racist tweets and asked if he could imagine how black people may view him as no less a racist than Trump.

In response, Walsh said: "I wouldn’t call myself a racist, but I’ve said racist things on Twitter.”

Whenever someone white says they are guilty of saying racist things but are not themselves racist, it illustrates a greater concern for the consequences that come with being branded “racist” rather than the damages inflicted on those who have to suffer from racism. Walsh, like many of his sad ilk, is worried about his reputation, not the black people hurt by his racist language. He does so because he thinks nothing is worse than being called a racist – although plenty of black people will tell you it’s far worse to be a victim of racism.

But if Joe Walsh still fails to grasp this, he is ill-equipped to make any moral case much less one to Donald Trump about racism.

Interestingly enough, Wallace asked Walsh that if he is so concerned about Trump’s unfitness for office, would he be open to voting for more progressive candidates like Elizabeth Warren. Although Wallace is a conservative who worked for the George W. Bush administration as White House Communications Director, she shared with Walsh that she will vote for any Democrat for the sake of getting Trump out office. Walsh would not make such a declaration, though he said he may come around to it.

Walsh may not ideologically align with Warren, but he could stand to learn from her. Recently, the Democratic presidential candidate once again confronted past controversy related to her claims of Native American ancestry. “I know I have made mistakes,” Warren noted at an event in Sioux City, Iowa. “I am sorry for the harm I have caused. I have listened and I have learned a lot, and I am grateful for the many conversations that we’ve had together.”

What followed after that was an expansive conversation centered on policies for Native American communities – including as Vox’s Li Zhou reports “a wide-ranging plan she’s introduced that would target the dearth of federal funding that tribal nations have historically received. Her proposal would also enable tribes to enforce laws against non-tribal members and permanently establish a Cabinet-level position that focuses on Native American policies.”

Genuine apologies are appreciated, but when it comes to dismantling white supremacy – the very vessel responsible for a simpleton from a game show on NBC becoming President of the United States of America – policy is vital towards boosting the marginalized communities suffering under an oppressive system. Imagine if Joe Walsh had admitted his own racism, and while apologizing to those he offended, introduced legislation that would offer a substantive way to heal a rift. But Walsh doesn’t strike me as someone especially concerned with that –he seems more bothered by Trump’s lack of intellect and impulse control along with his general gaudiness that vexes him most.

That's what makes Joe Walsh’s campaign already look like a missed opportunity for both Walsh and “Never Trumpers”. Everyone who has participated in Republican politics since (at least) the Civil Rights era has to contend with the reality that Trump has done nothing more than turn up the volume on the GOP’s long standing habit of stoking racism for political gain. Trump did not appear out of thin air: he exists because all the bigots before him, including Joe Walsh, helped make him so.

What Warren did was not nearly as offensive, but she has nevertheless provided a template on how to make matters right: offer a sincere apology and back it up with policy to boost the community that’s been harmed. Joe Walsh, and those like him, need to wrap their minds around that already. If not, their campaigns are nothing more than a fool’s errand.