Posted on 03/02/2015 1:02:43 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
You may have noticed that the media likes to run critical stories about Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker — sometimes without doing much checking first.
As the Walker for president talk gains steam, you can expect to see more media attempts to break him in. That’s to be expected. But for now, that might be less important than the media he does have in his corner.
Consider how rapid Walker’s rise has been. As late as November, he usually polled in the single digits. Public Policy Polling had Walker at 5 percent last March, compared to 25 percent in its latest poll.
The turnaround in Iowa is even more pronounced. Walked typically polled around 5 percent of the vote last year, with his best performance in a survey of possible GOP caucus-goers 8 percent. In late January, he broke into the double digits for the first time. Two February polls had him in first place with more than 20 percent of the vote, which happens to be his Real Clear Politics polling average in the state.
Ditto New Hampshire, where Walker’s best performance last year was just 7 percent. He’s been pretty consistently in the double digits since then, even though Jeb Bush, Rand Paul and Chris Christie are all strong in the first-in-the-nation primary too. Gravis Marketing had Walker as high as 23 percent in February.....
[SNIP]
[Rush] Limbaugh has long joked about fighting with half his brain tied behind his back, just to make it fair. Maybe that’s all the fairness Walker needs.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
I picture Walker sitting across the table from the Alinsky-ites, with the American people standing with, and rooting for Walker.
You can change your mind on a lot of things. The style of clothes you want to wear, the toothpaste you use, even the toilet paper you use. But to me, changing a position on Amnesty (actually in my definition - giving illegals citizenship somehow) is like a decision to change one’s religion, or one’s views on something like abortion. It is a fundamental cornerstone of our sovereignty in my opinion.
Further, uniparty or not, [No] Amnesty is my requirement for a candidate. If there are none of them who agree, I stay home, likely with a lot of others.
I’m thinking different on amnesty. They haven’t been able to pass anything on it by legal means and now the EO route is in at least some trouble. I don’t see it happening.
I noted that when Walker spoke of accomplishments, we referred to “we”, as opposed to “I”.
Make that “he” referred to “we”...
WOW! I think Scott Walker may be my candidate for 2016. Chris Wallace threw everything at him and his answers were very satisfying.
I think the name “9yearlurker” tells us all we need to know.
One of the things I took from my college communications class was the importance of altering one’s view with new information. To be otherwise is truly to be a dinosaur. Scott Walker is no dinosaur. He is now an experienced and battle tried governor which is a good credential for becoming President.
Walker says “we” because he’s talking about the Wisconsin legislature and the voters -— unlike the endless, me and I of Obama.
He’s works a lot behind the scenes and he doesn’t lead with his chin - one good example is Wisconsin’s Right to Work bill that he’s going to sign this week.
He works...
Case in point.
Wasn’t Reagan once a Democrat?
Crediting Rush with Walkers recent success does a profound disservice to Walker. Rush picked up on Walker after his speech at the Iowa Freedom Summit. Walker alone is responsible for garnering that attention.
I’m betting Rush ends up backing Cruz.
Why do you think the GOPe is just as eager to support stuff like Obama Net Neutrality and the Fairness Doctrine as the Dems are? John McCain would have supported ANYTHING if it would have silenced Rush.
Rush doesn't pick'em in the primary season. He leans a lot but never "endorses" one candidate in the pubbie primary.
Many people claim he leans too much, but in 27 {almost} years of listening, I never remember Rush naming a specific candidate during the primary season as his recommended choice.
If I'm wrong, I'll gladly apologize to all.
I’m voting for Cruz. I do not trust any candidate who suddenly has an epiphany when they’re trying to get elected. I support Cruz because he doesn’t change positions. Vetting candidate’s records is the only way to vote. I don’t listen to their speeches. I check their records.
Rubio is a master fraud. He can look you right in the eye and lie to your face. The truth is that he squashed illegal immigration legislation when he was the Florida Speader of the House...lots of bills on his table that were never brought to vote...just like Harry Reid. Rubio has always supported amnesty. He is lying, again.
We also have to consider the dangers of “creeping latinoism”——if Rubio ever gains power, it’ll be “them against us.”
Some conservatives look for a perfect man to run for president. They are never satisfied, because Jesus is unavailable. Weigh a candidate’s stance on the issues you rank as most important. If you can’t figure out his position, do not vote for that person.
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.