"
A genuine outsider like Trump would face a kind of Hobson’s choice when taking office: either take what’s on offer or
nothing at all. This new President could choose to govern like a conventional Democrat or Republican and draw on a
party network for their nominees, essentially turning over the government to the establishment. Or they could strike
out on their own, trying to personally solve the problem of loyalty and competence without party support. The first
option forfeits their outsider status. The second option would almost certainly lead to disastrous results, with
incompetents running important government programs leading to a hodgepodge of incoherent policy decisions.
Perhaps the best that could be hoped for in that situation is that career bureaucrats would operate largely free from
effective White House oversight, with the government essentially running on autopilot.
It would take years, perhaps decades, for an outsider to establish the network needed to effectively control the
executive branch. The first step would be to develop a distinct, somewhat coherent, and comprehensive policy
program. The second step would be even harder: building a group of thousands (or at least several hundred)
experienced and knowledgeable experts who are committed to that vision.
Arguably, the closest we’ve come to this in the modern period was Ronald Reagan, who was an outsider of sorts. But
Reagan was able to draw from a relatively deep well of ideological conservatives—many of whom had government
experience in prior administrations—for key posts. Although he did not take advantage of the entire Republican
network, passing over the centrists in the party in favor of committed conservatives, the portion that he trusted was
enough to function. The Reagan example was essentially an intraparty struggle, rather than a genuine outsider
candidacy.
"