Posted on 01/25/2015 4:57:52 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
DES MOINES, Iowa — Scott Walker’s stock is soaring after a triumphant return to Iowa.
The Wisconsin Republican governor delivered a pitch-perfect speech to a room packed with influential Hawkeye State conservatives on Saturday, walking them through his robust resume and ideology with a passion that surprised many.
Activists say Walker came out on top after 10 hours of candidate speeches.
“It was a clear Walker victory. He had expectations coming in here, he was on everyone's shortlist and he had to meet those expectations and I thought he far exceeded them,” said former Iowa Republican Party political director Craig Robinson. “I thought his speech was just perfect, and I thought his delivery was perfect. The delivery really surprised me.”
Walker held his own against Ted Cruz, the event’s other star. While the Texas senator always turns in commanding performances with conservative crowds, the governor next door helped himself the most by making a strong first impression with many Iowa activists who simply knew him from his showdown with the unions.
He offered something for almost every type of conservative, rolling through his record of both social and fiscal accomplishments, drawing big applause by knocking “radical Islamic terrorists” and touting legislation he backed to relax gun control laws and cut taxes.
He spoke about his faith in a natural way, and in one sentence managed to mention that he was both the son of a pastor and had Iowa roots (Walker spent his early years in the state before his dad moved to a church in Wisconsin).
Most importantly, he did it all with a folksy yet fiery delivery that had observers gushing and brought the crowd to their feet.
The biggest question surrounding Walker heading into the weekend is whether his charisma could stack up against the other White House contenders. It was a worry Walker shared — one Republican who talked to him backstage said the governor expressed concern that people would view him as “bland.” But as the strode onstage with his shirt sleeves rolled up and paced about the floor, those worries vanished.
“Walker found a way to talk about himself, talk about the country and talk about Iowa in perfect proportionality, and he did so with a style that was very easy and engaging,” said Republican pollster Frank Luntz. “He connected to these people — you could see it.”
Iowa GOP power brokers say Walker has also performed well in casual conversations and private meetings.
“He was quite impressive in terms of him talking about specifics about what he’s done in Wisconsin and the kind of leader he was,” said Iowa Republican National Committeeman Steve Scheffler, who met with Walker last week at the Republican National Committee’s winter meeting in San Diego. “People want somebody like him who has a track record and isn’t afraid to take on the powers that be, whether that be Scott Walker or whoever.”
Walker hasn't had the luxury of spending as much time in Iowa as some of the other candidates who spoke on Saturday, thanks to his own competitive reelection he first had to survive last November. And, like every candidate, he still has plenty of work to do in the inaugural state with just over a year until the pivotal caucuses.
While he’s landed two top GOP strategists with Iowa experience in former Republican National Committee Director Rick Wiley and David Polyansky, a Texas-based strategist who was a top advisor for Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), he still hasn’t hired a full-time Iowa staffer.
Some Iowa conservatives also say he needs to develop more knowledge on topics he hasn’t dealt with as governor.
“He was very personable. When the questions were about his resume he was really good because he has a pretty good resume. When the questions got into a broader context about policies beyond his resume his answers were pretty canned, pretty typical formula talking points,” said Iowa conservative radio host Steve Deace, who interviewed Walker on Saturday. “It’s his first time out as a candidate but I do think he’ll have to provide a lot more substance on issues than when I got a chance to talk to him.”
But Walker made a big splash in his first Iowa appearance of 2015, stealing the spotlight from his likely foes.
“That's the first time I've ever heard him live and he was tremendous. It was a great speech,” said Sam Clovis, a conservative kingmaker and the GOP’s 2014 nominee for state treasurer. “That was something special.”
Excellent comment, especially this:
“Ted Cruz on the other hand is a once in a generation, perhaps lifetime superstar who can drive a team down field to score time and time again and who can inspire the defense to frustrate the enemy to defeat.”
I hope we don’t squander what may well be our last opportunity.
You mean the same independents that put Obama in office ...in 2008 and 2012...
2008 - 52 % independents voted for Obama...
2012 - 45% independents voted for Obama...
In 2014 election cycle independent voters broke this way:
" 47% of Americans identify as Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, and 41% identify as Republicans or lean to the Republican Party." Just 10 percent of Americans can be identified as "pure independents."
Yes...these independents will put Cruz over the top...?
You failed to cite or link your source which is the Cook Political Report headed by Charles Cook, a well-known Beltway mercenary who sells what you want to hear for a price you’re willing to pay. And he bases his results on a Gallop Poll which is not the only poll to capture the astounding 42% but who nonetheless always oversample democrats in the subgroup breakdowns.
http://cookpolitical.com/story/6608
Cook can do simple crosstabs statistics but he can’t sample because sampling costs money. He goes for the bargain basement sample which is Gallop.
So you’re starting off on shaky ground to say the least.
But then you destroy your credibility by reaching back to voter results in 2008 and 2012 when the Independents registered as 24% of the electorate, not 42% as in 2014.
And you failed to mention that Romney won the Independent vote in 2012 but not by much. In fact, if he had been a real conservative and not such a liar, he would have won much more of the independent vote and the Presidency as a result.
The majority of Independents are Conservative and they greatly support Ted Cruz.
Who do you think they do not want to be president? Here is a hint - his initials are T.C. and he was fighting Obamacare and defending the Constitution while Walker was sitting on the sidelines.
Note also that the article quotes GOPe types saying Walker had a great event in Iowa. This is all part of the GOPe/liberal partnership to demonize and sandbag the true conservative - Ted Cruz.
Yes, and that is also why the GOP-e continues to select leftist Presstitutes to moderate Republican debates.
It gives the GOP-e an opportunity to feed the moderator opposition research on Conservatives like Cruz, allowing the leftist Presstitute to "show" how Cruz is a "right-wing wacko bird", while the GOP-e candidate is "level headed" and "non-partisan", blah, blah, blah.
Past behavior indicated independents vote at least 40 % or more democrat...
The majority of Independents are Conservative and they greatly support Ted Cruz.
That's an opinion not backed up any any current polling...
Though I certainly would like to think your "opinion" is correct, it's still just an opinion...
I might add, the GOPe has the money purses in their back pocket...where exactly is Ted Cruz going to get the funding to run and win primaries...
Politicas after all is said and done is a lot more about money than principles...
Your problem is one of being myopic...you see politics though the prism of your conservatism...
In my business I meet thousands of people a year...I know lots of people who are fine decent people who would believe it's against their core beliefs to vote for Cruz, ask them why and you get a deer in the headlines look...
> “That’s an opinion not backed up any any current polling”
It’s not an opinion. It’s fact.
From the much more accurate Market Research Foundation Study:
The key finding: “Independents are nearly twice as likely to have conservative views as liberal ones.”
Intersting study...though it's only based on 1508 people...pretty small sample...
Seems to me after reading the study, independents vote based on the election time kitchen table topics...economic, healthcare, moral issues...rather than on principles...
Just as important as his voting record is his election record. I think the guy is a fine conservative but for some reason doesn’t resonate with me. The guy knows how to win elections though, that is for damn sure.
1508 people is plenty large enough as long as the sample design is well constructed.
It yields nothing to oversample when the sampling itself is prone to bias that skews results.
The Market Research Foundation Study Sampling plans are held in high esteem by marketing professionals. They are a proven resource.
Yes, Independents vote kitchen table issues and not GOP or Democrat issues. They do not trust the GOP; they do not like the GOP. They will vote for Ted Cruz in majority because of illegal immigration, Obamacare, Foreign Policy, Taxes and most importantly because they see the GOP establishment is set against Ted Cruz which strengthens his appeal as an independent-like candidate.
I hope you are right, but most people in this country have no idea the GOPe is trying to kill off the Tea Party, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee...
Foreign father, born outside US. He's a US citizen.
Were you born here to US citizen parents?
National Socialists?
I always remind them.
James Madison settled the issue during his presidency when he clarified that children born to a US Parent on ship or abroad were considered natural born because although their ‘residence’ may be abroad their ‘domicile’ was registered in the US.
For example,
A child born in France to a US Ambassador was considered Natural Born if the Ambassador retained a ‘domicile’ in the US.
There is a legal distinction betweem ‘residence’ and ‘domicile’.
At the time of the original Constitution, women were not allowed to vote and a women’s citizenship did not matter as long as she was married or a common law wife of a US Citizen.
During America’s colonial era and its beginning as a republic, many American men married women of Indian tribes because women were scarce and children were needed.
When a woman would marry an American man, a US Citizen, it was implicit that here status was the same as her husband’s. If he traveled abroad with her and she was pregnant, it was not uncommon that she would give birth on a ship. The birth would be recorded in the Captain’s records and used as proof to confer citizenship on the child. Same if the child was born after reaching landfall.
Ted Cruz’ parents, especially his mother worked in Canada but maintained her ‘domicile’ in the USA as evidenced by her paying US taxes while working abroad. Her husband’s status folds in with her status and his US Naturalization and US Citizenship boosts his intention to be an American faithful to the US flag.
The entire provision in the US Constitution regarding the President to be a Natural Born Citizen was prompted by a letter from Jon Jay to General George Washington that the President, as Commander in Chief of the Army must be ensured to be loyal with allegiance only to the United States.
The issues are not where one is born, whether it be in a US Territory, or abroad while working and paying US taxes, or whether one parent was not natural born. The issues are FAITH. LOYALTY AND ALLEGIANCE.
The reason Obama was challenged on his birth was not so much as to the scant and hidden facts of his birth (although they are scandalous), as they were to the character of his ALLEGIANCE AND LOYALTY to the United States.
Ted Cruz is faithful to the United States, and has demonstrated ample loyalty and allegiance to the United States.
His mother was born in the United States, never once taking citizenship of any other country, his father became a Naturalized Citizen of the United States and Ted was born to his American mother while she was working abroad keeping her domicile in the United States.
He is eligible.
Yes, Cruz is good. I think Kasich could bring both sides of the party together. I would like to see him run.
And as for tea partiers and Republicans fighting, there's a place for it, but here in Wisconsin, we've had our hands full making sure we can push through things like Act 10.
and I'm pretty sure im familiar with Walker. Probably a lot more than you are, unless you're in the Wisconsin Assembly or Senate. So yea, I've done my homework. Smart guy.
Rick? Either Santorum or Perry are both RINOs. Who are you supporting?
Rick Perry is the strong and capable governor of Texas
Rick Santorum is the washed out loser that was
There is only one viable candidate that does not meet the FReeper appellation of RINO and that is Ted Cruz. He is in my view, unelectable. America will demand a governor as next president
I think that Governor will be Scott Walker
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.