I remember the morning Charlie Kirk was shot. I was sitting at my desk in Washington State when my social media timeline started to buzz with news of an assassination attempt in Utah. At first, some reports said he was being treated and, for a while, many hoped might survive. Soon, those messages faded and the reports grew more ominous. An assassin had shot Charlie through the neck and killed him.
I was devastated. I spent the next week in a daze, speaking to people across the conservative movement. That week, many felt that the tragedy might have a silver lining, that Charlie’s death might move people to set aside petty differences and come together for the good of the country. That was his mission and, for a moment, it seemed that everyone was trying to honor it.
Finally, a reason to check your email.
Sign up for our free newsletter today.
Instead, his death marked the shattering of the American Right.
The immediate consequence was an epistemological collapse. Charlie Kirk was a political operator, and never shy about using provocation, spectacle, and controversy as part of his method. But he was always tethered to political reality and oriented toward political success. He was sensitive to public opinion and kept in touch with an unbelievable number of people in the real world. At his best, he tried to discipline elements of the Right, steer them away from delusion and conspiracy theories, and focus them on winning elections.
After his murder, that restraint disappeared. Candace Owens spent a full year promoting vicious conspiracy theories about Charlie’s death. The Groyper faction turned anti-Semitic conspiracy theories into a digital business model. The thought patterns of QAnon, once relegated to the fringes, devoured the minds of a growing number of conservatives. And young men, often tempted by these narratives, no longer had Charlie to guide them.
President Trump, too, lost an important influence. In the months before he was killed, Kirk was urging the president to pay attention to voters who were feeling the stress of inflation and the cost-of-living crisis. He tried to lay out a program focused on kitchen-table economics, bringing down the cost of housing, and helping the young feel a sense of optimism about the future. He also warned against getting drawn into a prolonged war in the Middle East, which, among other things, would raise the price of gas and consumer staples.
After Kirk’s death, the White House seemed to downplay this economic message. Trump boasted about the surging stock market, became preoccupied with building his grand ballroom, and launched the military strikes on Iran, which sent gas prices soaring.
The consequences became obvious this week. Voters told exit pollsters that the economy was their top issue. They were angry about the cost of groceries, gas, utilities, health care, and housing. And voters held a negative view of Trump’s economy by a 50-point margin—disastrous numbers that no president can outrun.
It’s the same story with corruption. After Charlie’s murder, I had hoped for a renewed commitment to political principle and public spirit. But as I watched people in high places, including some close to the Trump administration, it seemed as if we had reached the end of idealism and that naked self-enrichment was increasingly prevalent.
The Democrats shrewdly turned this to their advantage. When I appeared on The Ezra Klein Show in June, Klein pressed me on the Trump family’s crypto ventures and the president’s apparent pay-for-pardon scheme. I told Klein that the crypto launch was wrong and the pardons ill-advised. The corruption was indefensible.
The ultimate consequence was at the ballot box. Republicans faced a historic rebuke in the midterm elections, and will now have to pick up the pieces, resolve internal debates, and rebuild. The Right should be honest about what happened and have the strength of character to allow justice to proceed against corruption, while fighting unjust political reprisals.
Charlie Kirk was a political man who embraced the ambiguities and compromises that a political life demands. At his best, he was also a patriot and an idealist who wanted the best for his country. That is the legacy he left behind, and one we should honor.