Posted on 02/16/2015 3:41:51 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The Hill reports: “Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker will be among the possible 2016 Republican presidential candidates speaking to a prominent group of conservatives in Iowa this spring. Walker and Cruz will speak at the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition’s spring kickoff event on April 25, the group announced in a Monday statement.” Ironically, in an election cycle in which many pundits discount the influence of Christian conservatives, they could play a critical role in selection of the nominee.
In past cycles, these values voters have split their vote, never managing to unite behind a single, competitive candidate in time to make a difference in the race. And this time around, they certainly have a wide array of choices, including Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum and Cruz. If they really want to make a difference in this race, however, it makes little sense to divide up their support among these — and in fact little sense to give support to any of them.
The point of elections is to win so one can further an agenda near and dear to him or her, but the chances of any of these candidates winning over a preponderance of GOP voters is slim at best. They may be devoted advocates for social issues the Christian right cares about (limiting abortions, “preserving” traditional marriage, protection of religious liberty, school choice and support for Israel), but they are generally an anathema to secularized, moderate and/or nontraditional Republicans whom the party wants to attract. They lack what Henry Olsen and Peter Wehner remind us was critical to Ronald Reagan’s success, namely that “in addition to having the courage to stick to his ambitions, Reagan understood the nature of politics in a free society and always operated within the four-corners of reality....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
She is Queen of the GOPe.
But she’s not a Neocon.
Ted Cruz is more of a Neocon than Jennifer Rubin.
“The three most reasonable choices using that criterium would be Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) or Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) — precisely because they have appeal outside the value voters communities.”
If she can’t count to three, what good is her advice?
lol
That column is what is commonly referred to as “conventional wisdom”. That is such a shallow look at the dynamics of the potential GOP field that I cannot believe she was paid actual money to write it.
Isn’t it OK to like them both?
Not on FR.
The circular firing squad doesn’t work unless everybody has a target.
And we have months and months of pointless speculation snouy empty-headed columns written by people who think they have something meaningful to say (even in advance of having any actual declared candidates) before anything matters....but let not the FR servers run empty...
The Washington Post trying to help social conservatives is tantamount to a fishhook trying to help a nightcrawler.
Liberal wh*ore. all i have to say
Its ok to like them both.
Just don’t expect to be very popular on FR depending on the day.
Being a midwest guy, I see the potential for Walker to flip WI and IA to Red States.
Of course I said the same thing about Ryan and was stunned at his terrorable performance at the debate.
When Joe Biden cleans your clock, you are a BAD debater.
I like Cruz. I like Walker. You’re right about him being able to bring some purple states along for the ride, and maybe flip a blue one in the process. The whole primary season is too long, and too divisive for my taste, besides I stopped worrying about being popular a long time ago.
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.