Posted on 09/30/2014 7:45:10 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
The following assertion may not seem immediately intuitive, but I believe it to be true: Ted Cruz is the current front-runner for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.
First, I would implore all readers to watch a full Ted Cruz speech if he or she has not already. The man is simply a performative marvel. He manages to strike some sort of preternatural balance between fiery Southern Baptist sermon and stand-up comedy routine, invariably bringing crowds to their feet. In the era of the tweet-sized soundbite, Ted Cruz’s mastery of the one-liner and the pun are not trivial; they are integral to his success.
The only other potential candidate who holds a candle to Cruz in this regard is Chris Christie, who I wrote earlier this year still stood a fighting chance to acquire the nomination. I no longer believe this to be the case. Christie established a national profile early in his gubernatorial tenure on the strength of his attractively brash personality, and was well-positioned to marshal that into an extremely credible bid for 2016. Now, however, it appears he may not even end up running. (Though I don’t discount his chances completely.)
For all the partisan brouhaha associated with “Bridge-gate,” it looks increasingly like there was in fact serious malfeasance involved, and that malfeasance may directly implicate Christie. A report in the Bergen Record from September 4 revealed that low-level Port Authority Police officers, incensed the morning of the bridge lane closures about potentially catastrophic security problems, were ordered over police radio frequencies to “shut up” by high-level Police commanders. David Wildstein—Christie’s longtime ally, childhood associate, and formerly anonymous progenitor of the influential PolitickerNJ gossip website—was also observed surveying the scene that morning in a car driven by another childhood friend of both Christie and Wildstein, Police Lt. Thomas “Chip” Michaels. The idea that Christie had no knowledge of the plot now strains credulity such that he is virtually disqualified for the purposes of 2016.
The establishment Republican donor class seems to have acknowledged this. A clear subtext of Byron York’s Washington Examiner article last week on the new flurry of chatter about a potential Mitt Romney 2016 candidacy shows that the establishment has all but abandoned Christie. (York also conducted an informal poll of his Twitter followers about their favored 2016 candidate, and found that zero—literally, zero—had a preference for Christie).
It would not be a total shock if Christie gets indicted in the near future. It also seems highly likely that his close ally Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Democrat of New York, possesses some kind of “smoking gun” evidence implicating Christie in Bridgegate, given their shared jurisdiction over the Port Authority bi-state agency. The Wall Street Journal reported in December 2013 that Christie personally phoned Cuomo for still-undisclosed reasons pertaining to the issue. What was the nature of that phone call? We still don’t know. We do know, however, that at a press conference last week on the alleged terror threat facing the New Jersey-New York region, a reporter asked Christie whether any protocols had been put in place to prevent another dangerous security incident, like what occurred on September 11, 2013 as a result of the bridge lane closures. Comically, Cuomo himself intervened as a salve, rattling off a boilerplate non-answer; the two then walked off without saying anything further. Christie looked like a deer in the headlights.
So by my lights, Christie is basically finished.
Jeb Bush appears somewhat reluctant to run for family-related reasons, although he may well end up doing so, and Romney could feasibly run again if only out of sheer narcissism. In any event, there is currently no clear establishment favorite, and it seems unlikely that one will emerge any time soon.
Which brings us back to Ted Cruz.
In the post-Citizens United landscape, traditional donor class support is becoming less and less important. Multi-billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson was able to bankroll Newt Gingrich’s 2012 presidential bid as nothing more than a personal vanity project. Gingrich went onto win the South Carolina primary. That unpredictable dynamic will only have been heightened by 2016. Ted Cruz may be disliked by elements of the GOP elite, but he doesn’t have to rely on their support to prevail, as likely would have been the case in years past.
Instead, Cruz can lean on what I’ll term the “para-establishment”—a constellation of advocacy groups, media entities, individual mega-donors, and others who have long ago thrown their lot in with Cruz. The speech I linked to earlier in this piece was actually from the Americans for Prosperity annual conference in Dallas, where Cruz was a featured speaker. The crowd absolutely ate him up. He is admired by salt-of-the-earth Tea Party types, but also by powerful factions of the Republican vanguard.
Cruz’s stunt earlier this month at the gathering of persecuted Middle East Christians doubtless solidified his support among the “pro-Israel” neoconservative cohort orbiting around Bill Kristol. Kristol’s new media outfit, the Washington Free Beacon, gave Cruz a mouthpiece in the form of reporter Alana Goodman. (Cruz met privately with Kristol and other donors in Texas just days before the shameful incident.)
The Americans for Prosperity relationship shows that Cruz has been in the good graces of the Charles and David Koch network for years now. This is almost certainly a more significant courtship than earning support from the Republican National Committee.
Cruz also has a potentially compelling “personal story” which could give his candidacy an air of historical significance. He’d be the first president of Hispanic ancestry, and would absolutely be able to tailor a powerful message to that effect. A Harvard Law graduate whom professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz once described as “off-the-chart brilliant,” Cruz’s intelligence should never be underestimated.
For all his pretensions of down-home, aw-shucks conservatism, Ted Cruz is undeniably a member of the cultural elite. He counts his former Princeton classmate, Ramesh Ponnuru of National Review, as a personal friend. Meanwhile, Cruz is winning straw polls at major Evangelical events like the Values Voter Conference. Also, his wife is a managing director at Goldman Sachs.
The idea that Cruz could seize the nomination might seem far-fetched now, but the conditions of the American political system are changing radically, and it would be foolish to discount the idea. What’s the alternative? Jeb Bush? Really?
Rick Perry (also under felony indictment)?
Scott Walker (facing potential criminal charges of his own, as well as a fiercely-contested re-election this November)?
Lastly, does anyone seriously think that Rand Paul will be any match for Cruz’s guile?
People assumed Barry Goldwater in 1964 was far-fetched, too. And Ted Cruz is a lot smarter than Barry Goldwater.
Michael Tracey is a journalist based in New York City.
He was born a US citizen. That’s the law.
Both of the current Democratic and Republican parties gave Barry obama their seal of approval, rather than address their error and keep us safe from the usurper's damage.
There have been many, many opportunities to restore the symbol that our sole representative/leader be one of us and of us, a born and bred American, as I believe the founders meant and intended by the "natural born citizen" requirement, but whatever their reasons, both parties have had other priorities.
Now they have the opportunity to encourage the TEA party to take a sledge hammer to that symbol by seeing the democrats' "obama" bet and raising with Cruz, and then we'll all be complicit in killing that symbol once and for all.
Just another sign of our times from the generation that kills our national symbol, the bald eagle, with wind mills to save the environment and is killing the symbol of holy matrimony to make marriage legally whatever you want it to be.
So many symbols to kill, so little time, with each symbol's death like one of a thousand cuts, when only a few are needed for something so fragile.
I am not going to underestimate the ability of the GOPe to sabotage a Cruz campaign and foist another Romney on us. Early primaries are the key.
He received his natural born citizenship status through his mother under the laws in place at the time. Constitutionally Cruz is just as qualified for the presidency as someone born in Dallas or Denver.
You said.... 2016 is looking like just the opposite of ‘08 and ‘12 when there was a gazillion conservatives running and one RINO.
In case you didn't know, some of the GOP candidates in 08 were... Romney, Paul, Gingrich, Santorum, Huntsman and others. ALL RINOS's.
Yes, there were conservatives, but they were outgunned by RINO's. And you want more of the same?
You're nuts.
The MSM is going to go out to destroy ANY Republican candidate. Hell, they painted Romney - the most left-leaning nominee in modern history - as a crazy right winger. The key is nominating someone who has the communication skills to persuade enough people otherwise. We have a number of good communicators on the rise - from Pense to Cruz to Jindal to Kasich, Lee to Rubio to Paul in the Senate and slew in the House. Hell, even Christie is good in that sense. Those are just a handful. We have a good strong bench of people right now. Hopefully a few can work though the chaos of Washington, the media and our own incompetent party to rise to leadership positions.
On the one hand it'd be hard to make a big deal out of his freshman Senator status without appearing to slam Obama. On the other hand, in 2016 the Democrat nominee will probably be running as far from Obama as they can so slamming Obama won't be a problem. They may very well try and make it an issue. I doubt it'll work though.
Other than the paycut the family will take when she's forced to quit I don't see where that will be a major problem. Certainly not insurmountable.
Nothing would have happened, they both would have been president.
Ted is the most gifted orator of all the possible candidates - left and right.
John McCain wasn’t born I’m the US and was qualified to run.
George Romney wasn’t born in US and was qualified to run.
He may be a freshman senator, but being a Solicitor General is more experience than a Community Activist/Const. Lawyer.
It doesn’t matter, he has one parent that is a US citizen, just like Obama.
He is eligible. So was McCain.
He hasn't announced his bid for president, has he? And if he did, I'm not sure that it'd be a good thing; according to the info I've seen he was born in Canada and his father didn't become a naturalized citizen until 2005 — so I don't think that Mr. Cruz qualifies under the Natural Born Citizen clause. (I think the McCain/Obama election was put forward to establish precedent for ignoring the NBC-clause; Mitt Romney's father was born in Mexico [to American citizens] so I'm unsure of his [and therefore Mitt's] status under the strictest NBC definitions I've seen.)
We need him so badly!
I agree; but, honestly, I think he'd do better on the USSC — I have virtually no respect for that institution because of the people and decisions it's put forth, and that needs to change. (GONZALES V. RAICH, KELO V. NEW LONDON, and KENTUCKY v. KING spring immediately to mind.)
The Natural Born Citizen Clause?
One of Ted’s guys yesterday said there’s a 90% chance he’s running, and that’s ‘low-balling’ it.
>> 1) He wasn’t born in this country.
>
> But he is still a citizen by birth, which is the only definition of “natural born citizen” that has any legal weight.
He was born in Canada and his father became a naturalized citizen in 2005... so I don’t think he does qualify with the NBC-clause.
No one around here needs to sell me on Ted Cruz.
I’m a big fan and yes I do think he’s constitutionally qualified to be POTUS.
Just making a prediction the Left will seize upon his Canadian birth as a payback. That’s all.
Based on what law?
All you have to ask said Left is: If Ted’s mom went to Canada to get an abortion, was she aborting a Canadian or an American?
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.