Posted on 03/08/2015 6:45:11 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
It is now conventional wisdom that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is a first-tier candidate, if not the frontrunner, for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. It is just as much a given that Senator Ted Cruz is not regarded as likely to win the nomination. The reasons why this is so were on display yesterday at the Iowa Ag Summit, a cattle call event that brought leading politicians from both parties to Des Moines to hawk their wares to farm-state voters. As in the past, the agriculture industry and political observers were interested to see which of the potential candidates would show their obeisance to corn farmers by supporting ethanol subsidies and, in particular, the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) that mandates its use in gasoline. Though Walker has opposed the RFS in the past, as Politico noted, this year he acted like the Iowa frontrunner the polls tell us he is and backed it. By contrast, Cruz launched a frontal attack on it. It’s not clear that such a stand is as sure a guarantee of political death as it has been in the past. But these two stands as well as Jeb Bush’s more equivocal approach provide us with a chance to see how the crucible of principle works these days in Iowa as the rest of the country pays close attention.
Given that recent history tells us that winning Iowa requires a candidate to support the ethanol boondoggle that helps support corn farmers, it’s hard to quarrel with Walker’s decision. Walker needs to win Iowa and he feels he can’t afford to antagonize the farmers and the Ag industry groups that will pour millions into the GOP caucus fight to support candidates that back ethanol and oppose those who don’t. Walker is a man who has taken chances in his political life, taking on the unions and left-wing special interests in Wisconsin and winning fights that made him a conservative folk hero. But he sees no great benefit to playing the same game with Iowa farmers. He played it safe at the Ag Summit.
By contrast, Cruz knows that if he is to assume leadership of the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party, it won’t be by playing it safe. Instead, he chose to take on the ethanol/corn interests head on saying he was there to “tell them the truth.” There was no hedging his bets or resort to nuance. He said he’s against corporate welfare and the government picking winners and losers. Ethanol and the RFS are exactly that and he opposes them.
Does that doom him in Iowa? Maybe. But, then again, maybe not. Corn may be king in Iowa but not everyone who votes in the GOP caucus is looking to the federal government for a handout or hoping that government policies will keep pushing up the value of their land. Moreover, there is a case to be made that what voters want is principle rather than pandering. With many conservatives who talk a good game about small government nevertheless falling over themselves to make an exception for ethanol in order to win in Iowa, Cruz may be able to stand out as the candidate who isn’t willing to sell out.
It also presents an interesting contrast to Bush’s belief that he, too, won’t pander in order to win the nomination. Yesterday in Iowa, the former Florida governor reiterated his support for a path to citizenship for illegal aliens as well as his continued backing for the Common Core education standards. That’s consistent with his theory that seems to hold that in order to win in November 2016, he’s going to have to stand up to his party’s base on issues where he disagrees with it. But he wasn’t willing to extend that principle to ethanol. On that issue, he was all nuance yesterday, floating ideas about eventually phasing out the RFS “somewhere in the future.”
I believe it’s a mistake to think that any candidate can run against his party’s base and win its nomination, though Bush has an opportunity to prove me wrong. But I think it’s hard to take that sort of stance seriously when the same candidate is unwilling to be just as tough on a local GOP constituency whose desires for subsidies runs afoul of the party’s basic principles about the role government in the economy.
Walker appears to have made a powerful impression on the audience in Des Moines yesterday, taking shots at Jeb Bush for having “inherited fame and fortune” and signaling farmers that he will do their bidding. That may ensure that he will hold onto his current lead and follow in the footsteps of past ethanol appeasers like Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and Mitt Romney and do well in the first-in-the-nation caucus.
It’s a long, hard slog to next winter but if Walker is to be knocked off, I doubt that Bush’s odd combination of challenging the party core on hot-button issues while folding on ethanol will do the trick. Cruz may still be a long shot but I think he’s right in thinking that the only way for him to prevail is to slay all the sacred cows and not just those in states other than Iowa. As much as his well-earned image as an uncompromising zealot may make him an unlikely nominee, sticking to his guns on even this Iowa litmus test will make an interesting experiment in modern politics. Though Cruz is widely accused of debasing our political culture with his take-no-prisoners style, he may actually be enhancing it by giving us an example of what it means to stand on principle. And he may do himself no harm in the process.
No way is Walker a proven conservative.
If you want to believe journalists who refuse to do their jobs and report the whole story, that's your problem.
I’ll be voting for Cruz, period.
Good for Cruz!
Personally, I don’t think it will cost him Iowa either. The world needs more food, not more ethanol. Iowa farmers are smart enough to figure that out.
I don’t think this will split the base, I think the two of them will wind up as running mates. The only question is, who leads the ticket. Obviously I’d prefer Cruz at the top, the Walker partisans would prefer him at the top. But they aren’t going to go after each other hard because they are going to have an 8 year partnership. I believe.
How exactly is he going to turn things around?
I don’t ever believe journalists. And I never trust politicians until I see proof. And your liberal argument style nastiness simply does not substitute for facts
You can think whatever you want I don’t care Walker has not proved anything to me so I’m calling out the statement.
You can go on bloviating or you can attempt to prove your statement
I’m just saying no sale. That’s all
I am a common-man with the intense desire to campaign for an American leader like Ronald Reagan showed himself to be.
I am a part of the grassroots of America that yearns to be free from the obamanation, from the establishment, from the Chamber of Amnesty, from Satan's grip on America's heart.
I now fight to win, to elect a man like Ted Cruz to save our beaten-down nation.
The Reigniting of the Miracle of America will start when we Conservatives give voice once again to the grassroots movement of politics!
You already know this, but others might not: WI's motto is 'Forward'. MSNBC's tagline is 'Lean Forward'. How ironic, huh?
BTW, Bama's motto is "We Dare To Defend Our Rights". And guess what? Bama is now righteous Red and to the Right.
THis issue matters to agribusinessmen and farmers. It does not matter to the vast majority of voters, nor to any of those who don’t follow politics (LIVs) who will show up to vote in 2016 based on TV ad soundbites.
Zactly.
Like Jeffery Toobin is our “friend”. Hardly. He’s quoting Politico by the second paragraph, already, like they are some bastion of analysis and authority on conservatism.
We can expect to be, each of us, put through the meat slicer for the next two years. The Left saw how we devoured each other over the last primary months that caused the regurgitation of RomneyAnn as our nominee.
Very true. good points
I agree. Walker is the only won who actually has done anything against the democrats/media complex and won.
He’s a proven governor and leader that has defeated socialism/democrats time and time again.
Walker as president would restore the free market, freedom and prosperity in America
Yes the liberal news media plant seeds into conservatives like this ethanol bs . It’s meant to get the purists going saying Walker’s not pure . And it’s also meant to divide us. see who the liberal news media attack and that’s who they fear and who we should support.
They want principle until their own ox is being gored. Ted Cruz maybe would rather be right than president, like Henry Clay, but history remembers those who were presidents.
Hahahaha! You guys kill me. You howl about “RINOs” and “squishes” until we get near an election, and all of a sudden, any candidate that can fake conservatism or talk a good game is “Reaganesque” and “electable.”
> “It is just as much a given that Senator Ted Cruz is not regarded as likely to win the nomination.”
Iowa is never a predictor. Iowa just doesn’t matter.
It served as a predictor just once that I’m aware of on the Republican side: 1980.
The media Beltway types like Tobin are scared to death of Senator Cruz. They will bad mouth him every chance they get.
And Walker will be used by the media to suppress sentiment for Cruz. And once Walker is anointed, they will turn on him.
Statistically not significant.
Reagan was an outlier. He turned electoral politics on its head.
Are you talking about Walker?
Scott Walker has actually defeated socialism/democrats and the media in a liberal state several times on several issues and several elections. Walker has done conservative things, and passed conservative policies. Actions meant everything,words mean NOTHING.
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.