It’s conventional wisdom that generals are often prepared to fight the last war. After all, it makes sense: our understanding of the world is shaped by past experience. Heading into World War II, the great powers of the world largely adhered to the doctrine of naval warfare articulated by Captain Alfred T. Mahan in the 19th century: whichever nation builds the strongest fleet can control the seas, and whoever controls the seas wins the war.
Japan, a rising power in the early 20th century, applied that lesson victoriously in its 1905 war with Russia. Great Britain and Germany, fearful of losing their fleets, stared each other down in the North Sea for nearly the entirety of World War I.
In America, a World War I veteran aviator named Billy Mitchell proclaimed that the age of air power had arrived and that militaries needed to update their strategies with the times. Even after he demonstrated that bombers could successfully sink a battleship, his commanders remained unconvinced. Mitchell was court-martialed for publicly disagreeing with his superior officers.
On December 7, 1941, 84 years ago this month, Mitchell’s thesis was tragically proven. Japanese aircraft took off from carrier ships in the Pacific and struck the American naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. More than 2,000 sailors, soldiers, Marines, and civilians were killed. The attack was successful despite no Japanese soldiers setting foot in Hawaii and the Japanese fleet being hundreds of miles away.
A few months later, the United States struck back. Sixteen B-25B bombers took off from USS Hornet to attack the Japanese mainland. While the raid was not militarily decisive, it shattered Japan’s sense of invincibility. It showed that the Americans had adapted to the new game. Perhaps fittingly, the bombers used in the raid were named after Billy Mitchell.
Yet even then, Japanese military leadership did not fully appreciate how much warfare had changed. They prioritized building the world’s largest battleship, Yamato, rather than investing more heavily in aircraft carriers and aviators. After the Battle of Midway—where American bombers sank four Japanese carriers—the tide of the war turned decisively, and the United States maintained effective control of the air for the next three years.
Whether fighting a war, playing a football game, or engaging in politics, the principle remains the same: values don’t change, but strategy must adapt to the moment. Imagine an NFL team that believed any offensive strategy other than running the ball was morally wrong. They wouldn’t win many games. Every opponent would stack the line of scrimmage, but the team might still take comfort in its sense of moral superiority.
In politics, rhetorical strategies and tactics that work in one time and place may fail in another. A winning approach in one environment might be hopelessly doomed in a different one. Becoming too attached to any particular strategy risks missing the forest for the trees, and forgetting the whole point of the effort.
Many old-guard Republicans came up in a political environment very different from today’s. The conservative base is less trusting of big business than it was a half-century ago, and far less enthusiastic about free trade and foreign conflicts. A Republican candidate running a campaign copied from Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, or George W. Bush is unlikely to find much success in the second quarter of the 21st century.
We often take for granted how much of what we consider “normal” is simply the product of our own generation’s conceits. The culture and perspectives of the Baby Boomers, for example, have dominated American life for more than half a century, but that era is coming to an end. For better or worse, American culture will look very different fifty years from now. We must be prepared to adapt in ways that preserve timeless principles.
Technology has changed as well. Just as businesses can no longer rely on the Yellow Pages to reach customers, politicians cannot rely solely on five-minute cable news clips. Today’s voters increasingly get their news from social media, especially short-form video. Of course, nothing has yet replaced pounding the pavement and knocking on doors—particularly in local and legislative races.
A few weeks ago, Sen. Jim Risch posted a posted a one-minute clip explaining why his bill to stop appropriating money to the Taliban has not yet received a vote. I thought it was a great example of an old dog learning a new trick. But this is only the beginning. It’s not just campaign managers and communications directors who must grapple with new technology. Elected officials, lobbyists, and citizens alike must understand how technology is reshaping society. Innovations such as artificial intelligence and self-driving cars are on the verge of transforming the way we live and work. Policymakers must respond in ways that preserve freedom, safety, and prosperity while allowing innovation to take its course.
Change is inevitable. To adapt without losing our footing, we must first define our timeless principles. It’s easy enough to list them—freedom, liberty, faith, limited government, low taxes—but what do those concepts mean in practice? That is the challenge. Just as military leaders must define their objectives before fighting a war—what is this war meant to accomplish, and what does victory look like?—so too must we clearly envision what political victory means.
- What is the ideal income tax—5 percent? 3 percent? Zero? What is the ideal sales tax? Can we eliminate property taxes while maintaining local control and accountability?
- How big should state government be? Around 25,000 people are currently on the state payroll. Should that number remain the same? Should it be 20,000? 10,000? Zero?
- What does an ideal public education system look like? Fewer administrators and more teachers? Greater local control and accountability? Expanded school choice, where money follows the child? Should public schools be abolished entirely in favor of private education?
- How should we manage public lands? Should we sell off every acre? Some percentage? Manage them entirely at the state level, or continue the state–federal partnership?
- How should government approach marriage? Can we return to a system of one man and one woman? How should divorce be handled? Should the state exit marriage altogether?
- What should the federal stance on immigration be—more legal immigration, less legal immigration, no legal immigration? How much should Idaho do to enforce immigration law?
These are just a few of the policy areas where significant debate exists—not only across the political spectrum, but within the Republican Party and the conservative movement itself. Just as military leaders need a plan beyond simply winning a battle, it’s not enough to repeat platitudes about faith, family, and freedom. We must know what we believe and have a plan to put those beliefs into practice.
All of us need a north star to guide our way. But as I’ve written before, that north star doesn’t tell us how to navigate the mountains and valleys along the path. When our Lord Jesus Christ sent the disciples into the world to proclaim His gospel, He told them to be “wise as serpents and harmless as doves.” In other words, they needed to be prepared for anything. The Apostle Paul later wrote, “I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” He adapted his approach to different times and places, but he never wavered from his core message.
There are times for confrontational politics—for hammering elected officials, forcing votes for campaign purposes, and using outrage to motivate voters. There are also times for persuasion and cooperation—for bringing as many people on board as possible, even if that means achieving only 80 percent of the goal. Following the 2025 legislative session, I wrote that persuasion was clearly the best strategy this year, and the results proved it. Policies many believed were out of reach just a few years ago were enacted, not through a strategy of confrontations and obstructionist tactics, but by conversation and negotiation:
I am happy to have been proven correct, not necessarily because I enjoy being right but because this session has been great for the people of Idaho. The Bible teaches that there is a time and season for every purpose, and that applies to political strategy as well. There is a time for confrontation and a time for persuasion, and this year was a time for persuasion. I readily admit that confrontational politics helped bring us here, assisting in many of the primary races that went our way over the past few elections. Yet now, with a critical mass of conservative lawmakers in the Legislature, it’s time to adapt.
I believe that next year can be even better. Now that we’ve seen what worked and what didn’t, let’s all work together to win even more victories for the people of Idaho. I firmly believe that the IDFC, the Gang of Eight, and in fact a majority of Republicans in the Legislature are aligned on 90% of policy goals. Let’s form an even stronger conservative coalition heading into 2026 and build on the momentum we gained this year.
Solomon understood this:
For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:
a time to be born, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;
a time to kill, and a time to heal;
a time to break down, and a time to build up;
a time to weep, and a time to laugh;
a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
a time to seek, and a time to lose;
a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
a time to tear, and a time to sew;
a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
a time to love, and a time to hate;
a time for war, and a time for peace.Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 ESV
Savvy political operators understand that different moments call for different strategies, tactics, and rhetorical approaches. As we head into 2026, let us do so with confidence tempered by wisdom—fully prepared to handle the challenges of a world that is rapidly changing. Don’t get caught up in fighting the last war. Be flexible, adaptable, and resilient enough to fight the new one.
Gem State Chronicle is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
About Brian Almon
Brian Almon is the Editor of the Gem State Chronicle. He also serves as Chairman of the District 14 Republican Party and is a trustee of the Eagle Public Library Board. He lives with his wife and five children in Eagle.
