Posted on 02/20/2015 9:09:49 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The Washington Post’s Chris Cilliza explains…
A prominent Republican consultant — who isn’t working for any of the 2016 presidential candidates and has been right more times than I can count — said something that shocked me when we had lunch recently. He said that Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) had about the same odds of becoming the Republican presidential nominee as former Florida governor Jeb Bush.
Jaw-dropper, right? After all, the conventional wisdom is that Bush, the son and brother of presidents, is the Republican standard-bearer, while Cruz, a conservative’s conservative, is a factor, sure, but not someone who could actually win the nomination.
How, I asked the consultant, could he say such a thing? He explained it this way.
Think of the Republican field as a series of lanes. In this race, there are four of them: establishment, tea party, social conservative and libertarian. The four lanes are not of equal size: Establishment is the biggest, followed by tea party, social conservative and then libertarian.
Obviously, the fight for the top spot in the establishment lane is crowded, with Bush and possibly Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker leading at the moment. Ditto the social-conservative lane, with former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson and Rick Santorum pushing hard there. The libertarian lane is all Sen. Rand Paul’s, but, as I noted above, it’s still not that big.
This leaves the tea party lane, which is both relatively large and entirely Cruz’s. While Paul looked as though he might try to fight Cruz for supremacy in that lane at one time, it’s clear from his recent moves that the senator from Kentucky is trying to become a player in a bunch of lanes, including social conservative and establishment. So, Cruz is, without question, the dominant figure in the tea party lane.
What that means — particularly in the early stages of the primary process in places such as Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina — is that he will probably be able to win, place or show repeatedly, racking up enough strong-ish performances to keep going even as the establishment and social-conservative lanes thin out. (Cruz’s ability to raise money, which remains a question, is less important for him than it is for other candidates — especially those in the establishment lane. His people are going to be for him no matter how much — or little — communicating he does with them.)
The trick for Cruz, the consultant said, is to hang around long enough to be the preeminent figure not only in the tea party lane but also in the social-conservative lane. (Cruz is decidedly conservative on social issues and talks regularly on the campaign trail about his faith. ) The complicating figure in that consolidation effort is Huckabee, who is (a) likely to run, (b) an ordained Southern Baptist minister and (c) likely to be able to stay in the race for an extended period because of the number of early Southern primaries.
But let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that Cruz is able to outlast Huckabee (as well as Carson and Santorum). If you combine the tea party and social-conservative lanes, that’s a pretty wide berth for any candidate hoping to be the GOP nominee. Is it as wide as a consolidated establishment lane behind Bush or Walker or Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.)? No one knows just yet, but it’s probably pretty close.
So watch Cruz. The combination of his running room as the race’s one true tea party candidate, his debating and oratorical skills, and his willingness to always, on every issue, stake out the most conservative position make him a real threat.
The 10 candidates with the best chance of being the Republican candidate in 2016 are ranked below. The No. 1 candidate has the best shot as of today.
10. Indiana Gov. Mike Pence. Pence hasn’t ruled out a run, though he’s probably got to choose between running for president and reelection in 2016. One recent development: Pence expanded Medicaid in Indiana after negotiating some concessions from the Obama administration — though we’re not sure whether this would help or hurt him in 2016.
9. Huckabee. The former Arkansas governor is giving every indication he is running. If he does, he will be a factor because of his strong following among social conservatives. An NBC-Marist poll released Sunday showed him on top of the field in Iowa.
8. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. Jindal is the résumé candidate in the GOP field. He’s shown us little besides that, though, apart from occasionally tossing some red meat to the conservative base. The latest example: not backing down from his comments on “no-go zones” for non-Muslims in Europe.
6. (tie) Cruz. See above. Remember that although he is roundly derided by his colleagues — Democrats and Republicans — in the Senate, he may be closer to how the GOP base feels on most issues than anyone else running.
6. (tie) Ohio Gov. John Kasich. After lying dormant for a few months after his convincing 2014 reelection victory, Kasich will spend two days this week in South Carolina. That trip will spark some buzz about whether he will run, but Kasich may have waited too long — Walker, another Midwestern governor from a swing state, is on the rise.
5. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. Increasingly, it’s looking as if Christie missed his window for running for president in 2012. A new Rutgers-Eagleton poll shows that his favorable rating in New Jersey hasdropped to 37 percent — after topping out at nearly 70 percent. And it’s not just his home state. Polls of likely GOP voters in Iowa and New Hampshire show that he is the most unliked Republican not named Donald Trump.
4. Paul. Speaking of people whose stock is dropping, the senator’s vaccine comments continue to baffle us — especially because he continues to play the victim card. Yes, there is a segment of the GOP that probably likes the idea that Paul is taking on the “liberal media.” But there’s also a much bigger portion of the party that will look at his vaccine flap and see Ron Paul 2.0.
3. Rubio. Yes, his path to the nomination is complicated by Bush’s all-but-announced candidacy. But if Republican voters are looking for a fresh face who could, theoretically, expand the party’s appeal, then Rubio could be the dark horse in the race.
2. Walker. The Wisconsin governor is clearly ascendant right now, thanks in large part to his strong speech at an Iowa confab a few weekends ago. His ham-handed handling of an evolution question, however, and his decision not to answer questions in London during a trade mission are not good signs.
1. Bush. The former Florida governor remains the top dog , and he got a big break when Mitt Romney opted not to run. Bush probably would have remained No. 1 even if Romney had got in, but the 2012 nominee’s exit makes Bush the obvious choice for GOP establishment types
One note Johnny.
That's because Cruz has the votes of the people, while Bush has the money of the elites.
The time may be past where sheer force of dollars determines the winner. The situation in this country is that dire.
Yet we could raise many millions for Ted Cruz if we wanted to.
Cruz is a Senator. We have a Senator as POTUS now. It has been a disaster. Walker is a blue state Governor. He is decidedly a successful governor as a Conservative in a Blue state. It might not be New York Blue, but it is not exactly Texas or even Ohio. Walker has shown he can get things done. Governors are also much more likely to be elected President than is a senator. 2008 was an anomaly
A smart candidate and consultant would try to get a coalition going. A marriage of sorts. An early ticket announcement or better yet an agreement that Walker appoint Cruz to the Supreme Court with his first available pick in exchange for his endorsement and help campaigning.
Where would Cruz do more to disrupt the Leftist agenda? A four or eight year tour of the Oval Office, or a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court?
I read the excerpt. 45 wasted seconds I’ll never get back.
I wish I cared.
He's never compromised, cashed in, sold out, eased up, cooled down, waited his turn, stepped aside or gone with the flow. He's just a righteous dude. What a crappy politician. He probably has a 0% approval rating with the media/establishment!
I had no idea.
Thanks for posting.
Many Conservatives do not realize that New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez was a registered Democrat until age 37.
She switched parties in 1996 and ran for District Attorney as a law-and-order Republican.
Martinez is frequently mentioned as a GOP Vice Presidential candidate in 2016.
Few Conservatives realize that 61% of Hispanics in New Mexico voted against her when she ran for governor in 2010, even though she has Mexican heritage on both sides of her family.
My money is on Walker—the race now is for VP slot Maybe Martinez? Maybe Mitt? Maybe Huckabee?
Whatever.
Here was Dr Carson two years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpiryahOspY
Keep an eye on the turd on the Left.
Running on responsibility is a hard pill to swallow
Like noses and “behinds”, everyone has an opinion, time will only tell who has the biggest.
According to some googling, Romney wrapped up the 2012 nomination with a Texas primary win. That primary was MAY 20, 2012, not March.
Susana Martinez told her story at the 2012 GOP National convention. She says she had been a Democrat, and a man (I can’t remember who, came and spoke to her and her husband about politics in general, and ‘why she was not really a Democrat - but in reality she was a Republican - because her political views skewed towards conservatism.
She said at the convention, that she then studied the policies of the GOP vs the Democrats, and realized it was true. That was when she changed her political affiliation to GOP.
To my eye, though, Martinez looks like a standard center-left Republican who simply made an effort to slow down state spending.
There is no indication she wants to slow down legal immigration, which is steadily destroying Conservative political power.
There is no indication she wants to slow down work visas and Green Cards, which are destroying the wage scale for low skill Americans and American software engineers.
My instincts say she will be soft on USA military spending and soft on the defense of Israel.
She is soft on Abortion, which will demoralize some Christian Conservatives.
And my instincts say she will be way soft on the Constitution and will appoint many center-left judges like Chief Justice John Roberts.
I'm also not a great fan of former Democrat Ronald Reagan.
No question that 1981-1984 was the best single presidential term for Conservatives since Calvin Coolidge.
But things fell apart in 1985-1988.
Government spending increased dramatically.
Reagan made no serious attempt to privatize Social Security, and he approved a “rescue” plan that simply increased taxes and increased the retirement age.
He increased taxes in exchange for utterly bogus Democrat promises to control spending.
He signed the Reagan Amnesty in 1986 that ignited the avalanche of legal immigrants we live with today, and that would make it impossible for him to be elected governor of California in 2016.
There's no question that Reagan played a vital role in ending the Cold War.
In my opinion, though, if someone like Putin or a healthy Brezhnev had been leader of the Soviet Union from 1981-1988, instead of Gorbachev, I think we would still be fighting the Cold War.
Looks like I was almost 3 months wrong, looks like the Pubbie primary in 2012 was may 29.
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/TX-R
That reinforces my opinion that TX primary is way too late to have any real say in the process.
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.