The GOP’s old dogs had better learn some new tricks

The GOP just took an electoral butt-kicking. As we nurse our wounds, the first order of business is getting some very old dogs to learn new tricks — fast.Start in my home state of Iowa, where Senator Chuck Grassley is 93. He has been in politics since 1959, when he entered the state legislature, and he was elected to Congress in 1974 — just a year after I was born. That’s quite a run. It needs to end.Young voters swung hard toward Democrats, and independents broke decisively against us. Republicans cannot win the presidency on nostalgia for 2016 or wishful thinking.Democrat Rob Sand just won Iowa’s governor's race. He takes office in January. If Grassley dies before his term expires in January 2029, Sand could appoint a Democrat senator until the seat is filled by election. That’s another vote against Trump's Supreme Court nominees and potentially another vote to convict him should the House impeach him.Why gamble with that? Grassley could retire now and let Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds appoint his temporary replacement before Sand takes over. Grassley is gambling with a Senate seat and perhaps a Supreme Court seat. It’s not his gamble to make alone. He could leave as a statesman instead of hanging on like a crypt keeper in Mitch McConnell’s mold. I don’t think that is too much to ask of a man who has spent nearly seven decades in public life.Which brings us to another old dog: Donald Trump, now 80. In the aftermath of the midterms, he said his deportation policy might have been “too tough.” Then he insisted there would be no amnesty and his policy hadn’t changed. That's a lot of gray area, and it should give anyone who remembers Trump's COVID-era zigzags a familiar sinking feeling.Trump's political standing is no side issue. If he can’t restore confidence in the movement he still quarterbacks, states such as Iowa and Texas could repeat their Democratic victories, and whoever Republicans nominate in 2028 will inherit a mess.Young voters swung hard toward Democrats, and independents broke decisively against us. Republicans cannot win the presidency on nostalgia for 2016 or wishful thinking about the next nominee. We need to win some of those voters back, and we had better start while Trump is still in office.Trump’s appointment of Stephen Miller as White House chief of staff is a welcome sign that he understands the need to fight. Now let’s see policy instead of another press release. Voters aren’t interested in being told they’re winning while watching their own party get steamrolled.RELATED: No amnesty. We’ve seen this movie before. Al Drago/Bloomberg/Getty ImagesImmigration is where we’ll find out what Trump actually means. The movement didn’t spend years fighting for border enforcement just to hear, after a historic defeat, that the policy was suddenly too harsh. Nor can the White House call every hint of compromise a misunderstanding and expect the base to shrug it off.On Sunday's “60 Minutes,” Trump said his deportation policy “might be too tough.” He talked about longtime workers in landscaping and hotels being removed from the country, describing their deportation as “a tough thing.” When Ross Douthat raised the possibility of legal status for such workers, Trump entertained the idea of a deal. By Monday, Trump was saying no amnesty. So which Trump are we supposed to believe?I see three possibilities, and each tells us something different about what comes next.First, Trump really wants some kind of amnesty deal. That could split the Republican base wide open. Immigration has been a defining issue for Trump's voters, especially the younger men the GOP spent the last decade trying to bring aboard. A betrayal on this issue could create room for a Ross Perot-style insurgency in 2028, with the Republican nominee stuck paying the bill.Second, this could be a trap for Democrats. With Miller running point, Trump might be offering a compromise he expects the other party to reject. After Democrats beat Republicans nearly two to one among independents in one post-election survey, forcing them to explain why they can't accept a deal might be politically useful. If the Democrats revert to their usual radical form, Trump gets to say he tried and they refused. Maybe. But that's a dangerous game when your own side doesn't know the rules.RELATED: The GOP’s worst defeat may be its best chance to move on Megan Varner/Getty ImagesThird, Trump may be looking for insurance against impeachment. Democrats have won the House, and the final Senate picture still depends on races including Alaska. Conviction requires two-thirds of senators present. I can imagine three or four Republicans voting to remove Trump, with others tempted if they thought the political coast was clear. It’s possible he’s signaling flexibility on immigration to keep some of those amnesty pimps and low-T Republicans from joining a removal effort.I don’t claim to know which explanation is right. That’s the problem. Our voters shouldn't have to decipher a president’s immigration policy like a coded message, especially after an election that went this badly. Leaders have to say what they intend to do and then do it. Otherwise, every new interview becomes another round of Kremlinology for people who already feel betrayed.We know a tree by its fruit. Trump has reinvented himself under pressure that would leave most men curled up in the fetal position. Perhaps he can do it again. Grassley has one last chance to choose his legacy, too.But after a beating like November 3, the old dogs don’t get to demand unlimited patience. Learn the new tricks, gentlemen — or get out of the way.