Posted on 11/10/2014 2:21:34 PM PST by SeekAndFind
The ink was barely dry on Scott Walker’s ballots in his third statewide win in four years when Chuck Todd asked him about his pledge to serve out four more years. That’s understandable; everyone assumes the two-term Governor of Wisconsin has national aspirations, and his invitation to Meet the Press was not offered to discuss Badger State water policy, after all. Walker didn’t give much away about his own plans, of course, but he offered the GOP some advice on 2016 that may well be self-serving eventually:
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) is staying tight-lipped about his plans for 2016, but said on Sunday that a governor like himself would have a better chance of beating Hillary Clinton than a member of Congress.
“Overall, I believe governors make much better candidates than members of Congress,” Walker said in an interview with “Meet the Press.” …
Walker said the GOP will have to campaign on an outside-the-Beltway approach.
He pointed to the 31 Republican governors nationwide who could offer “a much better alternative from the old, tired, top-down approach in Washington.”
“We need something fresh, organic, from the bottom-up, and that’s what you get in the states.”
Self-serving or not, it’s still good advice. The driving force on both sides of the aisle the past few cycles has been populism — progressive populism for Democrats, conservative populism for the GOP in the form of the Tea Party. Both want a clean sweep of Washington, and both have gone after their own incumbents to get it. Putting up a Beltway candidate would fly in the face of that trend, especially anyone who has any actual legislative accomplishments on their resumé, since the only way to achieve those will be to work across the aisle. These days, with the grassroots on both sides (but more so for the Right), that makes you an establishment figure. Just ask Marco Rubio how it worked out on immigration reform, for instance.
In order to find someone with solid achievement on their record, especially reform, both parties will have to look to the states. Hillary Clinton could have been an exception had her only claim to legitimacy had been at State — and had the foreign policy of that era not been exposed as entirely feckless and incompetent. (Reset buttons are no more a resumé enhancer than Tuzla dashes, after all.) Hillary’s main claim to the nomination is that her family will have been in and around Washington for almost a quarter-century by the time the election rolls around. She has no executive experience other than State, which is a record she’ll be dodging rather than lauding, and making nostalgia and novelty (the first woman President!) the centerpieces of her campaign. Instead of being about the voters, Hillary’s campaign will be about herself.
Democrats don’t have many options outside of the Beltway, though. Progressives want Elizabeth Warren to run, but she’s also a first-term Senator who won a relatively close race in exceedingly-safe Massachusetts. Martin O’Malley looked like a good alternative until Maryland voters decisively sent his hand-picked successor packing, electing just the second GOP governor since Spiro Agnew in one of the bluest states in the country. John Hickenlooper might have had presidential aspirations, but just barely survived in Colorado on Tuesday. John Kitzhaber is a train wreck in Oregon, Jerry Brown is way too old in California, and Andrew Cuomo has too much baggage in New York.
Republicans have a lot more bench talent out in the states, many of whom have solid track records on reform. Walker certainly qualifies, as does Rick Snyder in Michigan, and Bobby Jindal in Louisiana. Mike Pence and John Kasich have Washington experience along with their gubernatorial CVs, although both have some skeptics among the grassroots. If Republicans want diversity, they can look to Susana Martinez in New Mexico or Nikki Haley in South Carolina, or even Brian Sandoval in Nevada, although his pro-choice position would probably scotch any presidential aspirations — and he seems to be salivating over the prospect of taking on Harry Reid in 2016.
On top of that, Obama’s disastrous and incompetent tenure practically makes the argument without debate over the need for executive experience in governance before taking on the presidency. This is why the gubernatorial ranks have traditionally been the farm clubs for both parties. Mark Levin disagrees in part, but only to the extent that gubernatorial experience alone qualifies one for President:
The point is that Republican governors are going to have to do much better than expect all of us to accept their self-serving definition of presidential qualifications; they’re actually going to have to tell us how their records justify us promoting them to the presidency, as will all other candidates. And I don’t care what political office they’ve held. If they’ve supported big-spending and big-government, and reject the constraints of constitutional government, they’re not qualified by any measure.
True — and one can deduce from that how Levin would judge a Kasich primary campaign, for instance. The implicit recognition in this argument, though, is that a candidate needs a record that shows how they will perform in office, as opposed to campaigning or operating in the legislative minority. Talk is cheap. Look at Obama and “hope and change,” for an object lesson on that point. If voters want a record of actual achievement, the ranks of the governors may not be the only place to look, but there won’t be many other options.
Walker is the ideal candidate....tested and thoroughly vetted. If liberals had anything on him, they would have used it.
He must lead the ticket and setup the next generation. A Tea Party Cruz, Lee or other minority would be great.
The left has nothing to offer. They can only defend the socialist state. They have no new ideas.
Walker can destroy any Democrat with a positive agenda.
1) Energy independence
2) Replace Obamacare with insurance CHOICE an no subsidies for big insurance
3) Restore our manufacturing might by re-shoring manufacturers
4) Spending control to balance the budget
That is all it would take. Simple, clear messaging.
Walker 2016
Are you from Brooklyn?
RE: Walker can destroy any Democrat with a positive agenda.
What about his stance on illegal immigration?
He has a mixed message, which tells me he not decided on the issue.
It all depends on who gets to him first...the establishment RNC and Chamber of Commerce or the Tea Party control our borders first group.
I think we can win this. Walker is a good Christian, conservative and anti-union. He will get the "control borders first" argument.
I recorded it because it was worthwhile watching twice and showing it to my husband. The best part was he was talking about the economic recovery of the state. F Chuck tried to paint him as a failure.
Here are my favorite parts, sans Todd’s leading questions.
re: That he can’t seem to get above ONLY a 53% win.
“Our state’s a blue state historically, it’s been a blue state. We can’t win without independents. We won, again, with double digit votes from independent voters. And probably one of the most exciting things for me was 18 to 24 year olds was statistically essentially a tie. So we reached out to young voters, not just traditional voters, who were voting our way. “
re:Can WI ecominic model work elsewhere
“Well, I think in our case, certainly we had a little bit of a slow down early on with the protest. But in the last year, we saw the best from September to September, the best private-sector job growth we’ve seen in more than a decade. Our unemployment rate’s down from 9.2% in 2010 down to 5.5%”
re:ste revenue going down
“No, that’s just the opposite. The reason revenues are down is because we cut withholding. Withholding at the state and the federal level level is where the government takes more of your money than you actually owe them and holds onto them without getting you interest. We cut that in April. So we anticipated that reduction of revenue because we gave the hardworking taxpayers more money back. And that $1.8 billion is based on a projection of no growth and no changes to the budget. That just doesn’t happen.
In our case, if we have the average of the last five years of revenue growth, we actually have the next budget starting with more than a half a billion dollars in surplus.”
re: not taking Medicaid like Kasich did
“No. From our standpoint, we did something unique, unlike just about any other state in the country. For the first time ever, not a person in our state is on a waiting list for people living in poverty. They all have access to healthcare through Medicaid, but those living above it are transitioned into the marketplace and we don’t put our taxpayers at risk. I mean, think about it. States that have taken the Medicaid expansion are betting on the fact that the Congress and the president, who can’t deal with the $17 trillion are going to magically somehow come up with new money. They haven’t paid that money for Medicaid even to the states as we speak.”
See more
Wow. Thank you for the info.
i live here. it’s not a democrat state. it’s been 50-50 forever and it’s because of three cities. most of the counties go republican. the three major cities tilt crap to make it appear worse than it is.
where to look? TEXAS!
and he wasn’t talking about Charlie Crist, either, no matter how fresh and organic he may be
I'm sorry, your sick take is to use articles that were while she was McStain's running mate
Yeah, I noticed that disingeuousness on your part.
Now go ahead, find us a any hint, any possibility the woman is pro-amnesty after that.
Question: Are you ignoring this fact for political reasons, or just ignorant?
Go ahead we'll be waiting.....
Times have changed and the Presidency now requires more executive skills than back when communication meant telegraph or letters, and the Executive branch was much smaller.
Our best Presidents have been Governors or military leaders, because those were the places where men obtained public service and executive experience.
Good catch. A lot of that is from Walker’s stump speech which he gave to every gathering willing to listen. The news media and his opponent tried to paint a very negative picture of the state of the state. It’s clear that the voters kenew the difference.
I’d like someone who isn’t open borders like Walker.
RE: I’m sorry, your sick take is to use articles that were while she was McStain’s running mate
Yeah, I noticed that disingeuousness on your part.
Now go ahead, find us a any hint, any possibility the woman is pro-amnesty after that.
______________________
I don’t know what’s sick about presenting to you what she said before. If she has changed her mind, I’m all open to hearing about it.
Why don’t you educate us by directing us to a reliable link where she has articulated her present stance on illegal immigration instead of attacking me?
Thank-you. He is unflappable. More people should know his record because his is the high-water mark.
Here is an exchange I forgot to include. The people of CA should listen.
“TODD: You still believe in the pension for government workers?
WALKER: We have the only fully-funded pension system in the country because of our reforms and because of the reforms that were put in even before I took office.
I do not think he is for open borders. He has talked on both sides of the issue in a smart way so nobody can pigeon-hole him.
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.