Posted on 09/17/2015 10:33:37 AM PDT by conservativejoy
If the general environment fits Cruz nicely, the dynamic of the campaign is favorable to him, too.
Ted Cruz isn’t topping the polls or dominating the conversation, but he’s one of the winners of the past few months.
His odds of winning the nomination have increased more than anyone else’s besides Donald Trump, and if you believe (reasonably enough) that Trump isn’t built to last, more than anyone else’s, period.
Let’s review. There was always the danger of Cruz, who made his national reputation on the strength of a misbegotten government shutdown, seeming like too much of a bomb-thrower. That was before it began to look like the Republican Party is open to a candidate only slightly less disruptive than Auguste Vaillant, the 19th-century French anarchist who struck a blow against politics as usual by literally throwing a bomb into the French Chamber of Deputies in 1893 (the establishment wasn’t amused — it executed him).
Such is the disgust with the Republican leadership, that there is no longer such a thing as going too far. Cruz could burn John Boehner in effigy, and no one would bat an eye. Cruz could make a citizen’s arrest of Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor on grounds of gross crimes of omission against the constitutional republic, and the Luntz focus group would applaud his plucky initiative. In sum, there’s nothing Cruz could do short of pissing in the Yankee Bean soup in the Senate dining room that would be too outlandish, and even then his most devoted fans might say, “It’s about damn time."
This must be liberating for Cruz, who has already called McConnell a liar and blamed Boehner and McConnell for not stopping the Iran nuclear deal — and he’s just getting started.
If the general environment fits Cruz nicely, the dynamic of the campaign is favorable to him, too. There are few things Cruz should welcome more than the ongoing war between Trump, the anti-establishment gorilla in the room who is a major obstacle in his path, and the foremost establishment candidate, Jeb Bush, whom Cruz needs to be as weak as possible. Cruz can stand by and hope both sides lose, which isn’t a far-fetched bet.
While other campaigns have been flummoxed and discombobulated by the rise of Trump, Cruz hasn’t. He has a simple political True North — go where the base is. Once it became obvious Trump was catching on with the grass roots, Cruz’s play was obvious: Start acting as if Ronald Reagan’s only failure was not to have handed down a 12th Commandment — thou shalt not criticize Donald Trump.
Cruz can be very patient waiting for the mogul to come down to earth. The Texas senator has an ideological and geographical base that means he can play the long game.
Consider Iowa. Cruz is sitting in third place there, a comfortable place to be in the late-breaking state. He has captured the intense loyalty of a portion of the grass roots (evident in his consistently crowd-pleasing speeches) and lines up for the caucuses better than Trump does. Cruz is a preacher’s son who announced his campaign at Liberty University. He speaks forcefully on the social issues and is a down-the-line conservative, without a hint of a heterodoxy.
If he were to emerge and win Iowa, he would have a much stronger financial and institutional base to follow up his victory than the immediate past winners, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee. Cruz has raised more hard money than anyone else, and has significant super PAC support. If he merely held his own until March 1, he’d be in position to sop up delegates in the SEC states, including Texas.
On top of this, Cruz is very smart, disciplined and doesn’t make unforced errors — if he gets an opening, he’ll make the most of it.
Getting that opening will depend on Trump and Ben Carson fading (and someone else, like Carly Fiorina, not rising). But all Cruz needs is for the voters to become slightly, and only slightly, more desirous of political experience.
The Overton window has shifted enough that Cruz, in the Senate less than three years, almost all of it spent in political pyrotechnics, looks like the sober statesman. Compared to Donald Trump, he’s practically Everett Dirksen. Compared to Carson, he’s a career politician — a veteran of the George W. Bush campaign and administration who ran for the U.S. Senate as soon as plausible, and apparently has no intention of leaving unless it’s for a promotion.
It once seemed that Scott Walker could best Cruz with his record of accomplishment, but so far Republican voters aren’t in an accomplishment mood. It’s possible to imagine Cruz’s team secretly thinking, “What good fortune that our candidate has never governed anything, or seriously tried to pass major legislation.”
Of course, Cruz’s potential may never be realized. He should, in theory, be the elected officeholder next in line to pick up support from the outsiders, but he is very different stylistically from them. While Trump always lets it fly extemporaneously, Cruz is extremely deliberate. While Trump and Carson ooze sincerity, Cruz can let his calculation show — he sincerely supported trade promotion authority, until the politics shifted, and then he sincerely opposed it. While Trump and Carson are refreshingly different as communicators, Cruz is practiced and stentorian. He could make ordering a ham-and-cheese sandwich sound like a speech. (Trump is also, in many respects, a raging moderate, whose support ranges much more widely across the party than Cruz’s.)
However shrewdly Cruz is positioned in the primary, his candidacy might be a heavy lift in a general election. But there’s time to worry about that later. Cruz certainly has a more intuitive theory of the case than Jeb Bush: to wit, you have to win the primary to have a chance to win the general.
Unlike Trump and Carson, Cruz doesn’t need the usual political rules to be utterly suspended to win the nomination. He just needs them to be different, and to get some lucky bounces along the way. That looks likelier than it did six months ago.
Not you....I don’t think you said Cruz was a brilliant debater.
What are you taking about? This article has nothing to say about his debate style or skill, pro or con. It’s taking about how Cruz is well positioned to take the disillusioned Trump supporters when (not if) his campaign implodes. And I tend to agree with that analysis.
“At least I don’t lie about a candidate saying he is an expert in debating when he is not.”
Boy that is one of the most moronic statements I’ve read today. Nobody has “lied” about Cruz’s debate skills, and none of the TV commentators can deny that every answer his gives is strong. Maybe you, in your infinite wisdom, can cite some specific examples of why he is not a good debater. I’m guessing the answer will be crickets.
A probable strategy is clear in this article. Right now it’s about the long game, and money of course. Cruz seems to have plenty.
Because these debates are not, in fact, debates - they are dog-and-pony shows where candidates try to look "likable" and "relatable" to the American public.
Cruz isn't great at that, however gifted he might be in an actual academic-style debate.
Pretty sure this was posted yesterday. :)
When it is a debate. These debates are not.
You are of those who reminds me not to be tacky with dissing other candidates. I guess it gives you joy, so go ahead on. But your attitude will not change a single person’s position.
I have heard Cruz speak concise positions on policies important to me and I am with him.
On the road and I missed it. My search never seems to work.
Let’s not forget that, despite better interaction last night than via Faux News, these are not really debates.
If debate expertise were meant to translate directly to popularity, most of Bill OReilly’s guests would have his chair.
One does not successfully engage SCOTUS cases without possession of advanced debate skill and acumen.
Well he did call McConnell a liar, do everything in his power to stop the Iran deal (including inviting Trump to a rally about it), stand up for Kim Davis, raise more money than any other candidate, and make clear that he will filibuster any budget with funding for PP.
But I guess you want him to engage in the silly bickering?
If Cruz doesn’t start showing me something in these debates I will start having second thoughts on Cruz as VP. Cruz is too submissive and that’s not what we need in a future President.
Fair enough.
FRegards.
Truth is Cruz was not given much time. He has played it well.
He has stayed out of bashing fellow candidates.
He slowly moves and that is not all bad.
Now if he could just work on being more flashy and personable to the people.
His reputation as a skilled verbal combatant is valid and is the reason limiting his time to speak during the “debates” has been no. 2 priority, superseded only by sinking the USS Trump, of the organizers. It’s difficult to make an impression when they studiously avoid giving you an opportunity to speak. That’s why his buying ad time during the event was not only wise but necessary.
So, arguing and winning SCOTUS cases is little league?
As a poster noted above, you are pathetic.
BTW, where is your candidate Walker sitting right now, hmmmm?
...Because he recognizes these past two “debates” for what they are... sideshows. These aren’t debates, there’s very little in the way of substantive policy being discussed. Having 10-11 people vie for attention on CNN’s Freakshow is not going to win you an election.
But when the field gets winnowed down to four or five, and you’re still standing, there will be plenty of time to show off your debating skills.
He’s got plenty of money...
His ground operation is expanding in battleground states...
He’s actually playing this game like Barry...
Again don’t let facts get in the way of your crush. He is not a good debater that is the fact. Your bashing me does nothing to change that.
Because the MSM and GOPe is trying to ignore him hoping he will go away. If you look at the time he had in the debates he was treated like a guy polling at the #11 spot rather than 3-5 depending on the poll.
He has the money to play the long game many others do not. In January will people care who “won” the debate last night.
Have you listened to the answers he has given in the debates compared to the rambling and memorized talking points of others?
You must not hang around here.
Of course you are confused because it was not a debate. It was a Q&A like a press conference. Plus, he was rarely called upon.
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.