Posted on 04/02/2015 6:16:36 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was born in 1970, six years after events refuted a theory on which he is wagering his candidacy. The 1964 theory was that many millions of conservatives abstained from voting because the GOP did not nominate sufficiently deep-dyed conservatives. So if in 1964 the party would choose someone like Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater, hitherto dormant conservatives would join the electorate in numbers sufficient for victory.
This theory was slain by a fact — actually, 15,951,378 facts. That was the difference between the 43,129,566 votes President Lyndon Johnson received and the 27,178,188 that Goldwater got on the way to winning six states.
The sensible reason for nominating Goldwater was not because he could win: As Goldwater understood, Americans still recovering from the Kennedy assassination were not going to have a third president in 14 months. The realistic reason was to turn the GOP into a conservative weapon for a future assault on the ramparts of power. Hence in September 1964, William F. Buckley told an audience of young conservatives to anticipate Goldwater’s defeat because he had been nominated “before we had time properly to prepare the ground.” The candidacy had, however, planted “seeds of hope, which will flower on a great November day in the future.” Sixteen Novembers later, they did.
Today, however, there is no need to nominate Cruz in order to make the GOP conservative. Cruz sits in a Senate that has no Republicans akin to the liberals Goldwater served with — New York’s Jacob Javits, Massachusetts’s Edward Brooke, Illinois’s Charles Percy, New Jersey’s Clifford Case, California’s Thomas Kuchel. When Jeb Bush, the most conservative governor of a large state since Ronald Reagan (by some metrics — taxes, school choice — Bush was a more conservative governor than Reagan), is called a threat to conservatism,
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I see Rove is working his spin this week. He wrote a similar article using equally subject polling numbers.
“George Will missed the Reagan Revolution not only in 1976 but as late as 1980. In the 1979 Republican Presidential Primary, his first choice was Howard Baker, his second choice was George H. W. Bush, and his third choice was Reagan. Not until days before the 1980 general election did he write on November 3, 1980 that Reagan deserved election. For all his wonderful columns, the Republican electorate better understood the needs of the nation and the excellence of a potential Reagan presidency than Will. It is hard to believe he was so wrong about a matter of such great import, despite Reagan’s presence on the national scene for many years.” http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2727010/posts
I think Will has gone double senile
Has George been smoking some wacky weed ?
“Cruz sits in a Senate that has no Republicans akin to the liberals Goldwater served with ...”
George Will needs to retire.
“Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was born in 1970, six years after events refuted a theory on which he is wagering his candidacy”
WTF are you talking about George Will? I guess you’re so much more historically eriudite than the rest of us yokels that we cannot recognize context in depth like such a genius as yourself. FUGW POS.
Your so much better than the rest of us and we cannot even begin to comprehend the depth of your analysis.
ASSHOLE
What would Will walk and talk like if a good surgeon finally extracted the large pinecone trapped in his lower colon?? Will the world ever know?
Back to his argument. Cruz is trying to ignite constitutional conservatives. Will thinks these are the wrong people to fire up. Will says that the biggest bloc of R voters are the mushy middles, the low info voters. The ones who, presumably, went to the polls the last two elections. Where was George?
Numbers, states, which group always backs the winner? Will is still playing Blue Team vs. Red Team. Every constitutional conservative in the country is done with the sports metaphor for presidential elections. We don’t have a team. We want the country to return to a free republic, and we don’t care what the candidate who fights for it is called.
Will acts so high and informed, but he just wants his Red Jerseys to win. His bread is buttered. These Beltway Statists are actually the low info people. Conservatives today are fighting for the survival of the republic, both teams be damned.
I just want a choice. By the time the primary reaches Texas, the party has already anointed some ultra lame, blue state republican. At that point, I simply don’t care. And I can’t take the GOP seriously when they stick the inventor of Obamacare at the top of their ticket.
Oh thank you. Where would I be without somebody to point out my typos on my phone.
Frankly, I don’t see a dimes worth of difference on policy between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. If there is a difference, please let me know.
There probably is some difference but it would be infinitesimal contrasted with a true conservative candidate. I felt I had to vote for Romney. I still believe maybe I wouldn’t have been hurt as badly these last years with him in the WH. I’m not ashamed of that vote. But I’m done. Nothing will get me to vote Jeb. And if even I feel that way....
Rick Perry (Texas) was more conservative than Jeb Bush and that isn't saying much.
I feel the exact same way. I have already stopped voting for local Repiblicans, who I think are fools, but I vioted for both McCain and Romney. This time I will have no compunctions about leaving the top slot on the ballot blank.
I stopped donating to the Republican Party, two years ago. I also stopped paying my dues. I now only donate to individual candidates.
POOOOOOOR GEEEEOOOORGE...
HE WAS BORN WITH A SILVER STICK UP HIS ARRZZZZZ!!!!
not trying to be contentious some people actually think it is spelled with a ‘z’ not realizing it is an acronym
I totally agree with you 100%.
He’s been on FOX’s Special Report with Bret Baier, and I’m never quite happy with what he says. I prefer someone else to sit in that position on the panel
Lately, Tucker Carlson has been a panelist, and I can tell you Tucker is more conservative than most. For most who may not watch Fox’nFriends on the Weekends, Tucker is one of the 3 heading the show. More than not, it is Tucker who voices exactly what I believe; and it’s always more common sense than anybody else is saying.
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.