Posted on 02/03/2015 9:58:09 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Liking the cut of this guy’s jib more and more:
His speech at the Iowa Freedom Summit earned rave reviews, and was followed with what appears to be the first pro-Walker presidential ad. And everyone seems to have noticed what Walker’s opponents in Wisconsin have learned the hard way, repeatedly: he’s a formidable politician. This should worry his GOP rivals not only because of Walker’s win streak, but also because Walker is doing something many of them aren’t: he’s setting the terms of the debate instead of following the terms the Democrats have set.
Part of the media’s terrible coverage of national politics is the reliance on the personal: it matters to them who is saying it more than what is said. Romney got tagged as uncaring because he’s rich. But the classic conservative policies don’t reek of plutocracy when coming from the new crop of Republican stars, many of whom came from modest beginnings or are the children of immigrants, or both. Walker doesn’t even have a college degree, which itself is incomprehensible to modern Democrats, who are elitist and credentialist and genuinely don’t know what life is like in much of the country.
And neither does the media. Which is how someone like Walker could be so successful and still blindside the national press, who would struggle to find Wisconsin on a map. And it’s why Walker is a threat to other high-profile Republicans who have accepted the Democratic/media framing of the issues in order to make a national pitch. Only one of them can be right.
In other words, Walker is already doing was some of us have long advocated: don’t debate on the Democrat/Media Complex’s terms, set your own damn terms and force them to their knees. The Left is not used to being mocked and ignored: their media wing stamp their tiny feet and shout that attention must be paid to their trivial demands. But who cares what they think? In the Atlantic, lefty Peter Beinart is starting to get worried:
Walker’s rise illustrates the pitfalls of media coverage of the GOP race. Not many national reporters live within the conservative media ecosystem. They therefore largely assume that in order to win over the non-white, female, millennial and working class voters who rejected John McCain and Mitt Romney, Republican presidential candidates must break from conservative orthodoxy, if not substantively, then at least rhetorically…
Walker’s rise is a reminder that among Republican primary voters, and especially Iowa-caucus goers, the market for ideological or even stylistic innovation, may be smaller than the media assumes. Because the most striking thing about Scott Walker’s speech at the Freedom Summit, and his emerging campaign message more generally, is how retro it is. Walker concedes nothing to the conventional wisdom about what the GOP must do to compete in a more culturally tolerant, ethnically diverse and economically insecure America. And the GOP faithful love it.
Walker’s… message is simple and old-fashioned: “Take control from the federal government and big-government special interests and give it back to hard-working taxpayers.”
The key point here is: don’t buy into the premise of the question. Marxist Democrats (they’re out and proud now, so might as well call them what they are), abetted by their college boy, red-diaper-baby media cronies can only frame their narrative one way. (It infuriates them that Walker doesn’t have a college degree.) But Walker is a throwback to belief in the American Way — the notion that we are, indeed, E pluribus unum, not a collection of dialectically materialist grievance groups. But if the GOP wants to win, they’re going to have to ignore the boilerplate from the national disgrace that is our MSM and just plow through to victory.
“Take control from the federal government and big-government special interests and give it back to hard-working taxpayers.”...I like the sound of that!
And in that case, perhaps the US would have avoided a bloody civil war. The rule stands.
RE: Lincoln was never a Senator.
I think the point was to elect somebody who has EXECUTIVE experience in government for President and according to some people, Senators ( and by extension, Congressmen, much less one term congressmen like Honest Abe ) should not be considered for lack of executive experience.
My argument is this — we shouldn’t make this a sacrosanct rule.
Cruz and Walker should form a pact: they will not attack each other, and whoever wins the nomination will pick the other for VP.
RE: And in that case, perhaps the US would have avoided a bloody civil war.
I take it you don’t like Abe Lincoln that much and consider his leadership a disaster for this country...
He has already hired some RNC trash into his campaign, mistake number one. Don’t let any consultant or RNC scum near your campaign they are the kiss of death and the RNC would love nothing more than to implode this campaign as he is a threat to their anointed turd in the punch bowl Jebie the Bush.
Reagan was the last GOP President to understand this:
. . . don’t debate on the Democrat/Media Complex’s terms, set your own damn terms and force them to their knees.
The Bush father and son team never understood this but still managed to get over the finish line, basically, on Reagan's coattails.
Dole, McCain and Romney never understood this and didn't have enough a connection to Reagan to use his coattails to any effect. Neither will Jeb Bush, the Pillsbury Doughboy or anyone else supported by the GOPe.
“[Governor Walker] is setting the terms of the debate instead of following the terms the Democrats have set.”
Yep. And he’s very good at it. And it’s refreshing as heck!
Love My Gov! :)
“Eventually even those old cranky windbags will join the party too.”
We can do it without them. Easily. :)
It may not be sacrosanct, but it is a good guide line.
You don’t “be civil” to someone that seeks your extermination.
Most GOPers don’t understand the truth of that.
I take it you don’t like Abe Lincoln that much and consider his leadership a disaster for this country..."
In before the "South was righteous and divinely inspired and could do no wrong" crowd comes crawling out of the woodwork...
I would except there are a lot more Senators oozing out of the dark recesses. There are only 2 or three spines shared amongst the lot.
I just think a more experienced leader could have found a way to deal with slavery and the South's upsets about tariffs without civil war.
If Walker were elected President, how cool would it be to have Ted Cruz as Attorney General?!?
Cruz needs to be Senate Majority Leader.
Lincoln was never a senator. He was a one-tern congressman. He ran for the senate against Stephen Douglas, but lost.
And in general, Presidents whose only experience prior to the presidency was serving in the Senate have been some of our worst presidents. NONE of the presidents who previously served in the Senate could be grouped into a list of our greatest presidents. (Some would argue that JFK should be considered a great president, but I think he is considered in that way simply by virtue of his assassination - it is hard to point out any great and lasting legacy from his presidency other than Vietnam and the Cold War.)
Amnesty, by any brand name, is a deal breaker because it will destroy the Constitution with 40 MILLION new socialist voters wanting more free stuff.
Unless Walker has a “come to Jesus” revelation, he’s just the same as obamatollah, Boehner and Mitchell on amnesty.
Cruz is the ONLY one opposing amnesty for ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS.
Shame, he wasn’t a good president.
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.