Posted on 02/05/2015 3:03:38 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Unlike Rand Paul, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker does not believe the GOP needs an ideological update. Unlike Marco Rubio, he doesn’t represent a more inclusive future for the party. Unlike Jeb Bush, he is not a known member of the Bush family.
That just about makes him the most natural candidate for the GOP in 2016. He fought in deep-blue Wisconsin on core conservative movement values — and he won. Finally, here is a true believer who is also competent at politicking and governing.
At least that’s the pitch that's being made this week, as Walker enjoys his first wave of 2016 buzz. It also puts him in a position to be the hero of a story conservatives tell about themselves.
America’s different ideological camps all use stories to explain where the country is today and why. Many progressives think things have generally just gotten worse, in all ways but social issues. Since the rise of Nixon and later Reagan, they see right-wing triumph everywhere. Tax rates falling, welfare rolls slashed, wages stagnating, inequality increasing, Koch brothers smiling. Obama appealed powerfully to liberals, and the 00’s “netroots” in particular, because he was cast as a transformational president like Reagan.
The conservative movement’s narrative is one of frustration. Liberal ideas are proven failures. Where conservative ideas have been tried, they have flourished: look at broken-windows policing in New York City, or the light-touch regulatory burden that makes Houston a magnet for middle-income families. More and more Americans call themselves conservatives. And conservatives have generally been good at putting Republicans in positions of power.
But instead of a massive downsizing of Washington to Swiss canton–size, the presidents conservatives elect sign stuff like The Americans with Disabilities Act, or Medicare Part D. They work with Teddy Kennedy on No Child Left Behind. These laws not only expand the reach of the federal government, but invite further liberal expansion in efforts like ObamaCare or Common Core.
Why? Some conservatives blame a Beltway culture of lobbyists and influence-peddling. Others cite a lack of courage and conviction. They say we need a “true conservative,” but with the stones to win.
This is where Scott Walker saunters in and casually tosses his cape over his shoulder. His “budget repair bill” was not just a conservative tweak of the tax code — it was a very canny effort to weaken public-sector unions in Wisconsin. Many were predicting that Wisconsin’s strong labor heritage, combined with a public backlash against Walker’s confrontational politics, would unseat him. Instead, he became the first governor in American history to survive a recall.
His story fits right into that self-flattering conservative narrative of frustration. Walker didn’t try to charm Wisconsin’s liberal establishment with some Kenny G-soft-jazz conservatism; he threw liberals into a dark cramped room and turned Metallica up to 11. He stood for what the movement believed in, and he won not just an election, but a structural reform of Wisconsin’s politics that tips the game-board in a conservative direction. He expanded school-choice initiatives. He did not set up an ObamaCare exchange in Wisconsin, rejecting federal dollars. He signed a Voter ID law. And then he won re-election in a state that went for Obama by 7 points.
This is the story that “movement” people of any type like to hear: if you show your backbone, explain yourself clearly and loudly, the people will rally behind you.
This isn’t to say that Walker doesn’t have challenges. Although the conservative movement’s views are widely shared across the party, the movement is not identical to the GOP. National parties tend to be more forgiving of (and even anxious to have) an unorthodox candidate after eight years of exile from the White House. This leaves an opening for a Jeb Bush, or if every butterfly across the globe flaps just right, a Rand Paul.
Walker has deficiencies of charm and geography compared to Marco Rubio. The Floridian senator is not only a more attractive stage presence, but far more likely to drag his state into the red column in a 2016 race. Rubio also at least provides the hope of moving the needle among non-Republican demographics in a way that Walker does not.
But after the 2010 and 2014 elections, the GOP may settle on a story that Romney was uniquely charmless and Obama uniquely charmed, and that the only change the party needs is a leader from the Republican wing of the Republican Party. Walker fits that bill.
Then there’s this link
In the article Walker supports path to citizenship and says Bush would make a fine president.
Thank you. Now here is compilation of comments by Walker on immigration - and summarized by a less than friendly source.
It’s the article’s first sentence, so maybe you should ask the author how he gathered this opinion of Walker.
Check Post #34.
Sorry!
Check Post #37.
From the link you sent:
“we’ve got to have a healthy balance. We’re a country both of immigrants and of laws. We can’t ignore the laws in this country, can’t ignore the people who come in, whether it’s from Mexico or Central America.”
Finally, Walker told Raddatz he was not advocating deporting the estimated 11 million undocumented residents in the country.
He summed up his position this way: “I am saying in the end, we need to enforce the laws in the United States, and we need to find a way for people to have a legitimate legal immigration system in this country, and that does not mean amnesty.
Again, from the link you sent
Walker campaign spokesman Tom Evenson said they were consistent with his past comments on what to do with those living here illegally. Walker does not consider the penalty-laden pathway to legal status that he endorsed in 2013 “amnesty,” and he’s not advocating amnesty now, he said.
Yes. It has MANY quotes. That’s why I linked it.
When summed up you cannot say that he advocates amnesty. You cannot.
He will be speaking more on this, I expect.
What do you think Mitt Romney meant by this statement?:
..I would have the best chance of beating the eventual Democrat nominee, but that’s before the other contenders have had the opportunity to take their message to the voters.
“I believe that one of our next generation of Republican leaders — one who may not be as well-known as I am today, one who has not yet taken their message across the country, one who is just getting started — may well emerge as being better able to defeat the Democrat nominee. In fact, I expect and hope that to be the case.”
When gop-elite Mitt gives you the jet and the donors and voter base, it means his chosen candidate is most aligned with him.
We can take Romney’s platform, plank by plank and see how Walker is dovetailing into each of them.
Did you read the quoted piece in Post 37?
“He will be speaking more on this, I expect.”
I expect you’re right.
I don’t have that big of a problem with his position on immigration.
In a perfect world maybe but this is hardly a perfect world.
I like his positions overall and I’m really impressed with the fact that he has a checkable track record.
It’s still too early to make make a bedrock decision but I’m leaning heavily toward Walker.
Having a libertarian streak I was interested in Paul but I think he’s just flat out pandering now.
Ordinarily, I would opine that the media and the left (I know, that's redundant) will soon go to work on destroying Walker the way they've tried with Cruz.
What favors Walker, however, is that they've already thrown everything at him, and he's prevailed.
No.
I think he’ll be a formidable candidate and possibly an effective President should he win. But I don’t think we should expect him to be some sort of conservative “holy grail”.
I still need to wait and listen to Walker. I want to hear a lot more from him before I start thinking about breaking up with Ted Cruz.
“I think he’ll be a formidable candidate and possibly an effective President should he win. But I don’t think we should expect him to be some sort of conservative “holy grail”.”
I think expecting anybody to be a Holy Grail is a recipe for disappointment.
Walker has a proven track record in a state that mostly leans the other way.
I know the hard left hates him but that tells me that he’s managed to peel off more than his fair share of the middle.
There are multiple sources. Here is one. I’ve also included a few other good ones. Its best to understand his position now rather than several months down the road. To me, he’s all over the place.
http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/article/20130703/WDH01/307030324/Walker-endorses-path-citizenship
http://mediamatters.org/issues/border-security
https://hotair.com/archives/2015/02/02/scott-walker-im-not-for-amnesty/
Read the quoted material in Post #37. The material the author used to construct his “GOP ideology” remark about Walker.
Now, regarding immigration - Walker has not been boxed into a corner on this. His position appears to be contemplative and we will see how he addresses this, as we all know will happen.
Keep your powder dry until it’s needed.
As the saying goes If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Sounds like amnesty to me. What is your definition of amnesty?
Walker campaign spokesman Tom Evenson said they were consistent with his past comments on what to do with those living here illegally. Walker does not consider the penalty-laden pathway to legal status that he endorsed in 2013 “amnesty,” and he’s not advocating amnesty now, he said.
No. Cruz is a senator. He needs to stay there and finish the work he was elected to do.
You make a good point, he’s only 44 and his term runs til Nov. 2018.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.