The Lede

The Remaking of Lindsey Graham

林赛·格雷厄姆的重塑
Once a harsh critic of Donald Trump, the South Carolina senator became one of the President’s most dependable allies—a sign of what it takes to remain influential in today’s Republican Party.
这位南卡罗来纳州参议员曾是唐纳德·特朗普的严厉批评者,后来却成了总统最可靠的盟友之一——这足以说明,在今天的共和党里,想要保持影响力需要付出什么。
A person sitting in front of a microphone.
Photograph by Stefani Reynolds / NYT / Redux

On July 13, 2015, my Washington Post colleague Michael Gerson and I interviewed Senator Lindsey Graham about his long-shot and, as it turned out, not terribly long-lasting Presidential campaign. The day before, on CNN, the South Carolina Republican had unloaded on Donald Trump, who had glided down the golden escalator at Trump Tower the previous month to launch his own, seemingly improbable, Presidential bid. Other Republican contenders, perhaps wary of Trump’s growing appeal among voters, had been restrained in their criticism of the real-estate developer. Graham was unsparing. Trump, he said, was a “wrecking ball for the future of the Republican Party” and a “demagogue.” Trump’s depiction of undocumented immigrants as rapists and murderers, Graham said, was a “defining moment for the Republican Party.” He added, “If we do not reject this way of thinking clearly, without any ambiguity, we’ll have lost our way.”

2015年7月13日,我和《华盛顿邮报》的同事迈克尔·格尔森采访了参议员林赛·格雷厄姆,当时他正投身于一场希望渺茫、后来也确实没撑多久的总统竞选。前一天,这位南卡罗来纳州共和党人在CNN上对唐纳德·特朗普火力全开。特朗普上个月刚沿着特朗普大厦的金色扶梯滑步而下,开启了他那看似同样不靠谱的总统角逐。其他共和党竞选人或许忌惮特朗普在选民中日益高涨的人气,对这位房地产大亨的批评一直有所保留。格雷厄姆却毫不留情。他说,特朗普是“砸向共和党未来的一记重锤”,是个“煽动家”。格雷厄姆表示,特朗普把无证移民描绘成强奸犯和杀人犯,这是“共和党的一个决定性时刻”。他还说:“如果我们不清晰、不含糊地拒绝这种思维方式,我们就会迷失方向。”

When I asked Graham why he thought Trump’s message was catching on, he situated Trump within the same populist mode as the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, who had entered the Democratic Presidential race. “There’s a market, always, for this kind of stuff,” Graham told me. Still, he predicted of Trump, “At the end of the day, his growth potential is not great. He’s probably hit where he’s going to go.” It was nonetheless important to counter Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric, Graham said, not least because the Party was alienating such a significant chunk of the electorate. “I will not be part of this,” he told me. “I will not be part of this as a Presidential candidate, as a United States senator. I know better, and I have an obligation to speak up.” The disdain was mutual. Trump dismissed Graham as a “lightweight” and an “idiot.” He read Graham’s private cellphone number at a rally in South Carolina, much to the delight of the crowd.

当我问格雷厄姆,为什么他认为特朗普那套说辞能火起来,他把特朗普和以民粹路线参选民主党总统的佛蒙特州参议员伯尼·桑德斯归为同一类。“这种东西,永远都有市场,”格雷厄姆告诉我。不过,他预测特朗普“到头来,他的增长潜力不大。他大概已经触顶了。”尽管如此,格雷厄姆说,反击特朗普的反移民言论仍然很重要,尤其是因为共和党正在疏远这么大一部分选民。“我不会参与这种事,”他告诉我,“作为总统候选人,作为美国参议员,我都不会参与。我心里清楚,我有义务站出来说话。”这种鄙夷是相互的。特朗普把格雷厄姆贬为“小角色”和“白痴”。他在南卡罗来纳州的一场集会上念出了格雷厄姆的私人手机号码,引得台下人群一片欢腾。

Trump’s growth potential was, of course, greater than Graham had anticipated. And Graham, who died suddenly Saturday night, just a few days after his seventy-first birthday, became, over the past decade, very much part of this—an omnipresent adviser who was, with rare exceptions, firmly supportive of Trump’s extreme agenda. But during the 2016 campaign, Graham had resisted: like his mentor, the Arizona senator John McCain, Graham did not attend the Republican Convention that year, and he later revealed that he wrote in the name of the independent candidate Evan McMullin on the general-election ballot.

特朗普的增长潜力,当然,远超格雷厄姆的预料。而格雷厄姆——他在周六晚上突然去世,刚过完七十一岁生日没几天——在过去十年里,却深深卷入了这一切,成了一位无处不在的顾问,除了极少数例外,始终坚定支持特朗普的极端议程。但在2016年竞选期间,格雷厄姆曾抵抗过:像他的导师、亚利桑那州参议员约翰·麦凯恩一样,格雷厄姆那年没有出席共和党全国代表大会,后来他还透露,在大选选票上,他填的是独立候选人埃文·麦克马林的名字。

Once Trump was in office, though, Graham fell in line—and into Trump’s favor. If Graham felt an obligation to speak up, he muted it in the service of maintaining his remarkable access to the President—their hours together on the golf course, their White House lunches and frequent phone calls. “I’ve tried to be helpful where I could because I think he needs all the help he can get,” Graham told the Associated Press, in 2018. “You can be a better critic when people understand that you’re trying to help them be successful.” In an interview with the Times’ Mark Leibovich, Graham was even more candid about his motivation: “to try to be relevant.” Graham elaborated, “I have never been called this much by a president in my life. It’s weird, and it’s flattering, and it creates some opportunity. It also creates some pressure.” By this point, he had been in public office for nearly three decades, first in state politics and then in Washington, where he served four terms in the House before his election to the Senate in 2002.

然而,特朗普一入主白宫,格雷厄姆就顺从了——也由此得到了特朗普的青睐。如果说格雷厄姆曾觉得有义务站出来说话,那么为了保持与总统之间那非同寻常的接触——他们在高尔夫球场上共度的时光、白宫的午餐和频繁的通话——他压下了这个念头。“我一直在力所能及的地方帮忙,因为我觉得他需要一切能得到的帮助,”格雷厄姆在2018年对美联社说,“当人们明白你是想帮他们成功时,你就能成为一个更好的批评者。”在接受《纽约时报》马克·莱博维奇的采访时,格雷厄姆对自己的动机说得更坦率:“努力保持影响力。”格雷厄姆进一步解释道:“我这辈子从没被一个总统这么频繁地打过电话。这感觉很奇怪,也很受用,它创造了一些机会,也带来了一些压力。”到那时,他担任公职已近三十年,先是在州政坛,然后到了华盛顿,在2002年当选参议员之前,他在众议院干了四届。

One way to understand Graham’s transformation—on subjects including immigration reform, climate change, and fiscal responsibility—is through the lens of biography. Graham grew up in a back room of the Sanitary Café, a liquor store, pool hall, and bar that his parents operated in Central, South Carolina. But before Graham graduated from college, both of his parents had died; he had been particularly close to his father. “I came along late in my dad’s life, and he made the most of our time together,” Graham wrote in his campaign autobiography. “Whatever he did, he did it with me.” It is not a stretch to see the arc of Graham’s adulthood as a shift from one influential male figure, McCain (who called Graham his “ illegitimate son”), to another, Trump. That shift came despite the uncomfortable reality that Trump had derided McCain’s war service (“I like people who weren’t captured,” he said in 2015) and clashed with him as President, most dramatically when McCain offered a literal thumbs-down to the repeal of Obamacare in 2017. McCain’s battle with brain cancer, and his eventual death in 2018, coincided with Graham’s growing alliance with Trump. “John’s death really left a hole in his heart,” the Maine Republican senator Susan Collins said of Graham. “It seemed like Lindsey had lost a father.”

理解格雷厄姆在移民改革、气候变化和财政责任等问题上的转变,一个角度是从他的个人经历入手。格雷厄姆是在“卫生咖啡馆”的一间后屋里长大的,那是他父母在南卡罗来纳州森特勒尔经营的一家卖酒的杂货店,兼作台球厅和酒吧。但格雷厄姆还没大学毕业,父母就双双去世了;他和父亲的关系尤为亲密。“我在父亲生命中来得晚,他充分利用了我们在一起的时光,”格雷厄姆在他的竞选自传中写道,“他做什么事,都带着我一起。”把格雷厄姆成年后的人生轨迹,看作是从一位有影响力的男性人物麦凯恩(麦凯恩称格雷厄姆为他的“私生子”),转向另一位——特朗普,并不算牵强。这一转变发生的同时,却有一个令人难堪的现实:特朗普曾嘲讽麦凯恩的从军经历(“我喜欢那些没被俘虏过的人,”他在2015年说),并在担任总统期间与麦凯恩发生冲突,最戏剧性的一幕是2017年麦凯恩用拇指向下的手势,对废除奥巴马医改投了反对票。麦凯恩与脑癌的抗争,以及他在2018年的最终离世,恰好与格雷厄姆和特朗普日益紧密的联盟同步。“约翰的死,真的在他心里留下了一个空洞,”缅因州共和党参议员苏珊·柯林斯谈到格雷厄姆时说,“感觉林赛像是失去了一位父亲。”

But there is a larger point, and perhaps a larger lesson, in Graham’s evolving relationship with Trump: about the stories that politicians tell others, and even themselves; about the concessions they make in order to cling to power and influence; and about the particular way in which Trump has managed to bend the Party, and its leading figures, to his will. In the age of Trump, what were once mavericks are now vassals—unless they have left the Party or been effectively cast out. Graham would no doubt argue that this is a reasonable price to pay for retaining the ability to convince a President. After all, Trump’s support for Ukraine at the recently concluded NATO summit was, in part, a reflection of Graham’s passionate advocacy; Graham had returned from Ukraine just before his death. But consider the cost in tongue-biting and principle-swallowing this entails. After rioters stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, Graham seemed to break with the President. “Trump and I, we’ve had a hell of a journey. I hate it to end this way,” he said on the Senate floor that day. “All I can say is count me out. Enough is enough.” Just a few months later, in May, he said, “Can we move forward without President Trump? The answer is no. I’ve determined we can’t grow without him.”

但格雷厄姆与特朗普关系的演变,还有一个更宏大的要点,或许也是一个更深刻的教训:关于政客们讲给别人、甚至讲给自己的故事;关于他们为了紧抓权力和影响力而做出的让步;以及关于特朗普以何种独特的方式,成功地将共和党及其头面人物扭向了自己的意志。在特朗普时代,昔日的特立独行者,如今都成了附庸——除非他们已经离开了这个党,或者实际上被驱逐了出去。格雷厄姆无疑会辩称,为了保留说服总统的能力,这是一个合理的代价。毕竟,特朗普在刚刚结束的北约峰会上对乌克兰的支持,部分就反映了格雷厄姆的积极倡导;格雷厄姆去世前,刚从乌克兰回来。但想想这需要咽下多少话、吞下多少原则。2021年1月6日,暴徒冲击国会大厦后,格雷厄姆似乎要与总统决裂。“特朗普和我,我们一起走过了一段了不起的旅程。我讨厌它以这种方式结束,”那天他在参议院议事厅说,“我只能说,别算上我。够了就是够了。”仅仅几个月后,到了5月,他又说:“没有特朗普总统,我们能往前走吗?答案是不能。我断定,没有他,我们无法壮大。”

Graham, choking back tears as he spoke during a tribute to McCain after his death, said that among the lessons McCain had imparted was the imperative of flexibility. “He taught me that principle and compromise are not mutually exclusive,” Graham said. That may be, but the question lingers: In Donald Trump’s Washington, must so much principle be compromised that none remains? ♦

麦凯恩去世后,格雷厄姆在一次悼念活动中强忍泪水说,麦凯恩传授的诸多教诲中,有一条是灵活变通的必要性。“他教会我,原则和妥协并非互不相容,”格雷厄姆说。这或许没错,但一个问题挥之不去:在唐纳德·特朗普的华盛顿,是不是非得妥协掉那么多原则,直到一点不剩?♦

2 free previews left — register to get 30 translations a month