COMMENTARY: Voters grow weary with White House

Democrats have won control of both houses of Congress. Republicans should resist the temptation to explain the 2026 midterm defeat entirely through inflation, the war with Iran and unfavorable news coverage or poor candidates. Those factors mattered. But I believe the GOP also lost because too many Americans grew weary of President Donald Trump’s conduct — and because Republican officeholders too often refused to challenge him.

The Election Day evidence is striking. The Associated Press Voter Poll found that roughly 7 in 10 voters wanted Congress to do more to check presidential power, including about 4 in 10 Republicans. About 6 in 10 said Trump puts his personal interests ahead of the country’s. That is not simply an argument about tax rates or immigration. It is a warning about trust.

As a conservative, I believe it is important to acknowledge where Trump deserves credit. His administration made border enforcement a priority; U.S. Border Patrol encounters at the southern border fell to their lowest fiscal-year level in more than five decades in 2025. He extended major provisions of the 2017 tax cuts, pushed domestic energy development and deregulation, and made scrutinizing federal spending a priority. The administration also pursued improper payments and fraud in government programs. Its new investment accounts for children could encourage long-term saving.

Not every claimed saving has been established, and dismantling USAID as an independent agency eliminated programs whose humanitarian value deserved careful consideration. But conservatives can fairly support a secure border, fiscal accountability, lower taxes and individual opportunity without endorsing every decision made in their name.

That distinction brings me to the problem we have avoided confronting: personal character.

For decades, Republicans insisted that character mattered. We spoke about honesty, integrity, fidelity, humility, personal responsibility and respect for others. We argued that the moral example set by public officials was inseparable from the trust placed in them. Why should those standards vanish when a president advances policies we favor?

Consider the attempt by Trump’s allies on the Kennedy Center board to add his name to an institution Congress established as a memorial to President John F. Kennedy. Federal judges blocked the effort. Consider the proposed 250-foot triumphal arch near Arlington, the elaborate White House ballroom project and the decision to brand the children’s savings program “Trump Accounts.” Some projects may have merits independent of the president. Taken together, however, they convey a presidency unusually preoccupied with personal recognition.

Trump has repeatedly turned policy disagreements into personal attacks — against Democrats, journalists, judges and Republicans unwilling to give him unquestioning loyalty. It is possible to lead forcefully without being cruel, to disagree without humiliating others and to defend one’s record without demanding constant praise. These are not signs of weakness. They are habits of disciplined leadership.

His handling of allies has presented another contradiction. Conservatives traditionally value strong alliances and open markets. Yet confrontational tariffs on Canada and other trading partners have imposed costs on American importers, businesses and households. Presidents must also deal with dictators, including Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. Diplomacy is necessary; expressions of personal admiration, especially when paired with disdain for democratic allies, are something different.

But the more consequential failure belongs to Republican leaders in Congress.

The Constitution did not create a legislative branch to serve as a president’s cheering section. Lawmakers swear loyalty to the Constitution, not to the personality or political fortunes of the president. They should have supported sound policies, challenged unsound ones and objected to conduct that diminished the office.

Too many did not. Whether they were motivated by agreement, fear of a primary challenge or political convenience, their silence left voters wondering whether Republicans stood for limited government and constitutional restraint — or merely for defending Trump.

As a retired Army colonel, I learned that loyalty is not blind obedience. Good leaders welcome honest counsel, accept responsibility and put the mission above personal ambition. An oath is a commitment to something greater than the person temporarily in command. Congress should be held to that same standard.

Americans did not all vote for Democrats for the same reason. High prices, economic uncertainty and foreign policy were plainly important. Nor do the results mean voters embraced every Democratic proposal. But many voters — including Republicans — were asking for leaders with independent judgment and the courage to say no.

The Republican Party does not need to abandon conservatism. It needs to recover the principles that gave conservatism credibility: constitutional checks and balances, restraint in the exercise of power, accountability for public money and, above all, character.

For too long, Republicans have acted as though supporting Trump’s policies required defending Trump the man. It never did. No president is greater than the Constitution, and no party can credibly preach personal responsibility while making exceptions for its most powerful member.

We must once again stand for principles greater than any one individual — and for the American people rather than the ambitions of a president.

Mark Robertson is a retired U.S. Army colonel and former business owner who previously ran as the Republican candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives in Nevada’s 1st Congressional District.