Posted on 02/12/2015 2:35:12 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
For those of us who are sort of fascinated by the rise of Scott Walker as a Republican presidential contender, here's an interesting chart from Jason McDaniel, a political science professor at San Francisco State University. It shows the relative conservative-ness of GOP presidential nominees in the past six contested elections, and it demonstrates what an outlier Walker would be if he won next year's primary: he'd be the first candidate since Ronald Reagan who's more conservative than the average of the Republican field.
And by McDaniel's measure, he'd actually be the most conservative recent nominee, period—even more right-wing than Reagan:
Walker is well to the right end of the conservative spectrum, residing in the ideological neighborhood of Ted Cruz and Rand Paul....It is not a stretch to argue that if nominated, Walker would be the most conservative Republican nominee since Barry Goldwater in 1964.
....In contrast, Jeb Bush’s ideological position closely resembles previous Republican nominees. Bush most closely resembles John McCain in 2008....In Scott Walker versus Jeb Bush, party elites and primary voters are presented with clearly contrasting visions of the future direction of the Republican party....If the recent history of Republican nomination contests is any guide, the party is likely to decide that Scott Walker is too ideologically extreme to be the Republican nominee in 2016.
Of course, the fact that this chart seems surprising is one of Walker's big strengths. He may be as conservative as, say, Ted Cruz or Rand Paul, but he doesn't seem as conservative. He doesn't have Cruz's bombast and he doesn't go around hinting that we should go back to the gold standard, like Rand Paul. In practice, that may put him closer to the center of the field than his actual positions warrant.
Still, McDaniel's data is worth taking note of. If Walker remains hardnosed in his views, it may be hard to hide this from the voters. Eventually he's going to say something that will cause the Jeb Bushes and Chris Christies to pounce, and that might expose him as too much of an ideologue to win the mainstream Republican vote. It all depends on how well he learns to dog whistle and tap dance at the same time. But then, that's true of everyone running for president, isn't it?
Pack up the ILLEGALS, including the one in the Oval Office, and DEPORT THEM !
Me too. He’s my candidate.
Simple. One’s a Dem, the other’s a Republican. Different parties, different rules, different standards.
That's called offensive, taking the enemies positions.
A Republican winning in a long time conservative state is like claiming that Iraq holding Baghdad from ISIS is a victory.
Like claiming that getting a team of yes men to say yes is an accomplishment.
Put down the bottle. You are clearly drunk and delusional.
Scott Walker will LOSE !
You said that 3 times now and you are 0 for 0.....he won all 3 elections that you had hoped he lost. You were even in support of his recall and hoped he lost. You for some reason have some strange hatred for Walker. I don’t get it. He is a fine vetted candidate. I mean Cruz hasn’t even been vetted yet.
He appeals too LIBERAL VOTERS, ones who WANT ILLEGAL ALIENS WORKING FOR THEM AT BELOW MINIMUM WAGE.
Obama hasn’t been vetted, either!
I guess your right. Cruz really is pretty compatible with the White House. I wish him luck but I imagine he will easily walk into the White House. It is not as hard to become President as it used to be. Obama ruined it for the rest of future Presidents. No more vetting for the eventual winner. Not born in America. Little experience. We are so lucky!!!!
You sound hysterical.
The AVERAGE GOP contender has been MORE conservative than Reagan in the last 4 elections??? Puh-leeeeeeze.
“From what I’ve been able to garner, Scott Walker didn’t finish his degree because he had a job and went into politics. Oh! And there’s that other consideration, getting married and starting a family. [He married a widower 15 years older than he is and they decided to start a family ASAP.] He describes it nicely in this talk to the Christian Businessman’s Committee in Madison, WI”
I don’t think getting married was why he dropped out. He dropped out in the spring of 1990. He didn’t marry his wife until 1993. Getting married and starting a family probably factored in to why he didn’t go back to school but it is likely that it was due more to his political life than family responsibilities. My husband worked a full time job, two part time jobs and went to night school while we were married and had 3 children so it can be done.
I think he dropped out of school so he could run for office and get a job. Right after he dropped out he ran against State Rep. Gwen Moore. He ran for student offices at Marquette while he was a student there.
I’m a Cruz supporter but this college degree issue is so silly.
“For a guy who isn’t electable, he sure gets elected a lot. “
Amnesty and immigration have not been issues in WI state politics. Neither has foreign policy. The state has been more worried about jobs and fiscal matters. That has been what propelled Walker to success in WI. People experienced the results of his fiscal policies. Running for POTUS will be an entirely different ballgame and will have little to do with teacher’s unions.
YES, That states the problem clearly. HE APPEALS TO VOTERS.
Many here won't support anyone who has shown that they CAN beat Dems in elections and on getting laws passed. They are the apocalyptic *conservatives* .
Heck, look at all those in 2011 who said they would only support someone who wasn't even going to run after she quit her previous office.
But many of us are tired of Dems winning getting what they want and all we get is to hear blame and finger pointing instead of results.
“Walker is fine and no pro amnesty”
It depends on what your definition of amnesty is. He will say he is not for amnesty but past statements have shown he is for a pathway to citizenship for illegals. After his recent interview with Martha Raddatz his spokesman clarified Walker’s remarks saying that Walker does not consider paying fines etc. amnesty.
There are videos as well as news stories with his past statements on immigration out there. You’ll find links easily on FR. In one interview with the Wausau Herald one of the editors asked him if in the future he could foresee a time when illegal immigrants could gain citizenship by paying fines, etc. and his one word answer was “Sure.”
He also hasn’t defined what he means by “secure the borders” nor “deportation”.
It’s interesting how many of these polls, charts and graphs leave off Cruz and Palin. Right now non of them have officially declared they are running and both of them have expressed interest. I have been watching Walker closely since he was county executive. I just finished reading his book. IMO, for what it is worth, is that he is not quite as conservative as Palin and Cruz. He is pretty close to Priebus & Ryan. He supported Romney. I think he leans more towards being a faithful GOP guy. I’m not sure how much the GOPE thinks of him.
I think that all of the candidates will have to present specific policies and plans on how they will implement them if they want to be POTUS. Immigration will be a huge issue as well as national defense, foreign policy, Obamacare and fiscal issues. I think they will probably wait until they actually declare that they are running before we hear much more.
Lots of time yet.
“Seems to me that (i) what Walker said is that he supports a guest-worker program (i.e., a program in which immigrants apply to be admitted) that eventually could permit such immigrants to apply for citizenship, NOT giving current illegal aliens a path to citizenship (which is what is commonly understood as “amnesty”),”
No. This is not what he has said. There is video of him out there in several different interviews. In this one he clearly states that he believes in a pathway for illegals. It’s about at 1:46
(ii) Walker has expressed support for anti-illegal-immigration laws such as the one from Arizona that got struck down in 2010,
And he has changed his mind on that a couple of times. Again, the news stories are out there. I’m getting tired of repeatedly having to post them.
” and (iii) you are not a very good reader and easily prone to misread evidence to fit your particular agenda.”
And some people are putting words into Walker’s mouth that he never said because they want them to be true. It’s no different than those who blindly support Obama and refuse to face reality. You can deny this all you want and call people liars but there is VIDEO of this man saying these things and he has been saying them for several years now. Let’s wake up.
One of his spokesmen have recently clarified that by amnesty he did not mean paying fines etc.
He may change his statements between now and 2016. Then it is up to each person to decide what his real beliefs and intentions are. But in the meantime, gheez, don’t twist yourself into a pretzel.
You think Walker will win, being PRO AMNESTY?
Dream on!
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.
