In his Times column last Friday, David Brooks predicted that the plausibly imminent Rubio-Ryan era of Republican politics will provide us the “wonkiest leadership team in our lifetime.”

It’s about damn time.

Republicans bear the bad rap of being the party without a clear-cut policy agenda. Much of this perception is unfair. Their opponents often misleadingly equate the belief in separating private from civic life with a belief in lawlessness altogether. When that doesn’t work, they render all Republican policymakers as simple Simons.

But, admittedly, far from unintellectual, conservatism is nonetheless undetailed. It’s often moral leadership, not big ideas, that attracts the base. Attempts at the latter come with the deadly risks of unleashing the contrarian populist wrath of the grassroots, and far worse, of accusations of pretension.

A related issue is that policy isn’t sexy. Talk-show hosts and debate moderators eschew substance for far more accessible, and far more salable, discussions of pageantry or principles—like the vague or loaded so-called “gotcha” questions in the last couple Republican debates. Only by listening hard enough through the bombastic rhetoric of the vacuous pundits on the right will you hear the faint murmurs of the policy wonks.

It comes as no surprise then that the Republican leadership of the past decade has been strikingly unwonky. Boehner’s strength and recently his weakness was that he made deals, not policy. A far cry from little, nerdy Jeb, Bushes 41 and 43 gained political capital with their unassuming, and as one of my professors so eagerly points out, unintellectual brand of leadership.

So, why is a wonk like Paul Ryan the next Speaker of our House? And why is a wonk like Marco Rubio the likely Republican nominee to be our next President?

It’s because this year, wonky became cool, and cool politicians became wonky.

Policy writing, perhaps more than anything in politics, captures the millennial ethos: opportunities for innovative problem-solving, an emphasis on technical details, a rejection of the orthodoxy. The information generation seems to prefer specific policy ideas over broad ideological strokes.

They also like Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio—who aren’t just wonky, but also young and cool. Rubio especially capitalizes on his relatability: Whether it’s his rah-rah pride over his alma mater or his impromptu football games on the campaign trails, there’s something about the Florida senator that makes young voters overwhelmingly want to connect with him. Ryan had a similar strategy back in 2012, famously doing a workout photo shoot and selling himself as a fitness buff.

And just as Ryan found his niche as the numbers guy in the House, chairing the Ways and Means Committee and sponsoring over 70 bills, Rubio is emerging as the ideas man in the 2016 presidential field. He released by far the most comprehensive and feasible tax plan, his education plan is similarly nuanced, and his foreign policy expertise is unparalleled—his prediction during the second Republican debate that Russia would fill the vacuum President Obama left in Syria actually came through.

Wonkiness and likeability are certainly not mutually causal this election cycle. Rubio lies in stark contrast to the two other legitimate contenders for the presidency: Jeb Bush, who’s wonky but not cool, and Ben Carson, who’s cool—or at least unflashy and therefore appealing—but is anything but policy minded.

But still, Rubio and Ryan represent a new generation of conservative populations who are both intelligent and not overbearing, moving the Republican party away from a period of intellectual stagnancy and idle emphasis on moral leadership. In an era when the trite criticism against Republicans is that they’re moving the country backwards, Rubio and Ryan will move us unabashedly forward.

Shubhankar Chhokra ’18, a Crimson editorial writer, lives in Eliot House. His column appears on alternate Mondays.