Posted on 02/05/2014 7:13:52 PM PST by SeekAndFind
With Chris Christie still stuck in a traffic scandal at the foot of the George Washington Bridge, the donors and Main Street Republicans who make up the bulk of the GOP center-right establishment can be forgiven for feeling a little nervous.
If Christie fades, this cohort, which boosted both Mitt Romney and John McCain to the nomination, fear that a Tea Party-fueled candidate will take over the party, leading to a drubbing at the hands of the Democrats come November 2016.
Thus hopes have turned to Jeb Bush as a possible savior, even though the Florida governor has been out of office for seven years. It’s why Paul Ryan is practically being dragged into the race, even though the Wisconsin congressman and former vice-presidential nominee seems set on staying in the House. It’s why there have even been rumbles that even Romney is considering another go, his two-time rejection by the American public notwithstanding.
So without other options, can the establishment learn to love Scott Walker?
The controversial Wisconsin governor is slated to come and hobnob with top New York donors this spring, and he has quickly become a top draw for radio and TV bookers now that Christie has gone mostly silent. And although Walker’s public persona as a cultural warrior for the Tea Party became cemented after his efforts to strip the union public sector of collective bargaining rights, for many, his appeal actually lies in the fact that he may be one of the few Republicans running who can sway independent voters.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
here I have to agree with you ...
I think Sen. McCain spent a little bit too much time under duress . Now days he’s tetched
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOXQr9u8bBk
Scott Walker is not God. Nor will he be the only candidate.
An animosity towards service and government labor unions is not being "heartless or blase" toward working people. Government unions are on a collision course with reality. We are not a rich country anymore, and we simply cannot afford to pay people who work 1200 hours per year, on average, twice what the average american family earns with two wage earners working 4000 hours/year.
We also cannot afford to offer state and education workers defined benefit plans -- not just for our own good, but for their good as well. Defined benefit plans will absolutely crater when we reach the point where we have to monetize the Social Security debt. And make no mistake: we will at some point need to monetize the Social Security debt, and when we do, everyone on a fixed-benefit pension is going to be destroyed.
What people in Ohio who voted for Obama because he "saved GM" were not told is that everyone currently working was screwed in that deal. UAW workers were screwed most of all, because current UAW workers are making a fraction of what they are paying to keep retired UAW pension and medical plans afloat.
The UAW is about to organize a Volkswagen plant in Kentucky. Do you think it's heartless to tell the people who are about to take that vote that their benefit packages are going to be used to keep paying people in Michigan who haven't worked in 30 years, and that they are never going to see a dime of their own pension money? Because I will guarantee you that Volkswagen isn't going to tell them that, and the UAW sure as hell isn't going to tell them that either.
The GOP needs to stop worrying about votes. The GOP needs to fire the Frank Luntzes and the Karl Roves and all the other brilliant tacticians. The GOP needs to start articulating a message that connects with people. Reagan did not go out of his way to send his message to blue collar workers. He presented a message that said he was not willing to accept the idea of an America in decline.
Yesterday, the pResident's spokesrat articulated a position that a reduced workforce participation of 2,000,000+ jobs because of 0bamacare is actually a positive thing, because people would be able to "reduce their hours to part-time in order to get better healthcare subsidies."
I have only heard ONE commentator point out a fact that is very obvious to any working person who pays taxes: When people reduce their work hours in order to receive subsidies, somebody else is working to pay for them. ONE person.
That's a message for working people [and for all people]: Do you really want to accept the idea that people working less is a good thing? Do you really want to live in an America where it's considered acceptable for you to stop working so other Americans can carry you?
Why has not a single Republican pol articulated that message? Because squishy RINO's tell them that opposition to healthcare paid for by the sweat of others is "heartless."
BS.
What's heartless is to expect someone else to pay your bills because you don't want to work.
They keep thinking about 1964, and Goldwater, forgetting that if Kennedy had been running in 1964, that Goldwater would have fared much better running against a flawed and living Kennedy than against the myth of Camelot. Funny how they forget how “radical” Reagan was thought to be in 1980.
It’s called loyalty. He made her a national figure.
I read the story. All the expert sources who were praising him, were Romney folks, or former Romney folks.
That's enough to skunk Walker for me.
Well said. Worth a second read.
“Serving as muscle for America’s crony capitalism hardly strikes me as a qualifier.”
That kind of thinking clearly illustrates the need for establishing an honorable discharge as a prerequisite.
“I know that Poppy Bush served in WWII as a flyer, but I don’t know what branch he was in.”
Very interesting story; well worth a read.
He came pretty close to getting eaten by Japanese troops.
Walker was always the call. I’ve been saying this for over a year. Another Bush? Seriously? No doubt Christie would have been the establishment choice and since the party leans left at the top may still be. Nobody liked Romney. Half his votes if not more were anti Obama votes. I may like Cruz but he’s an easy target for the left on a national level. Sadly so is Palin. Theres nobody but Walker. Since Hillary is likely the one we might want to consider Martinez from NM as Veep. Female and latin. May sound opportunistic but shes got creds.
He is and i’m dead set against it but as one views the plans put forth nothing says a path has to be easy. One that penalizes for having been here illegally in the first place and one that calls for expulsions for those who don’t walk the path. At this point i don’t know any other way that will work.
Its no longer about winning for the party but keeping what power they do have. We’re watching the pubbies fade away.
Do you favor amnesty as well? And what is wrong with Cruz, Lee, Gohmert, Palin and a handful of others? Bob
No, Cruz is NOT an “easy target”. He fights back, and has them running for cover when he does. Bob
I’m not sure Walker is the answer but I can sure as hell tell you that Huckabee, Bush, Romney and Rubio aren’t that’s for damned sure.
Let’s not deny that Amnesty will DESTROY the United States of America and the American worker.
I prefer “The reverse-carpetbagger New York Senator/Sect of State.”
I like Scott Walker.
Its not about fighting back. Its how many shots they’ll take at him.
RE: I’m not sure Walker is the answer but I can sure as hell tell you that Huckabee, Bush, Romney and Rubio aren’t that’s for damned sure.
If you don’t like Rubio, you won’t like 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.