The switch grates on me, but doesn’t really surprise me. I haven’t read what he said specifically, but I’d put a lot more weight on his comment that it needs to be phased out eventually than on his supposed current support.
He’s after the Iowa vote. If he doesn’t get it, he’s unlikely to be President, so he “adjusts” his position a bit, accepting the reality of the present situation (ethanol is, in fact, already subsidized) and points in the direction the subsidy should go (Down...eventually).
It’s very similar to his Right to Work play. He called it a distraction and didn’t advocate for it, and signed the bill today. I fully anticipate that he would sign a similar national bill phasing out ethanol subsidies, and that the GOP Congress would put just such a bill in front of him.
Is he pandering? Yes. Does pandering work? Hell yes; the Dems have been doing it with a high success rate for decades now, but if I was an Iowa farmer dependent on ethanol subsidies, I’d be looking for a way to adjust my business plan if Walker is elected President.
Still, his flip-flop grates and I’m sure he thought long and hard before doing so, but then he does have a track record for getting elected, and he also has a track record of taking on the Left after he’s elected. That all counts.
“Still, his flip-flop grates and I’m sure he thought long and hard before doing so, but then he does have a track record for getting elected, and he also has a track record of taking on the Left after he’s elected. That all counts.”
I wouldn’t trust him to take on anything if he is flip-flopping on issues already.
Perhaps it is only a political ploy, perhaps it is his true feelings. How could we possibly know?
Cruz is attempting to do what Reagan did - stick to principle and try to sway voters to his side by using logic and reasoning.
Unfortunately, we’ve had 30 years of dumbing down since then and logic and reasoning are not skills the American people have any more. Neither are the pride of self-sufficiency and doing the right thing. So it may not work this time. But if it doesn’t - this country is toast, no matter who else gets in. We need a rapid turn about from fascism and need someone with the pair to do it - not someone that will pander (in non-PC terms, that word is really LIE).
Big difference than what you are claiming because once you take away the teat from the Corn-Welfare-Queens, many of them will not vote Conservative, because they are not Conservative to begin with.
A guarantee, though, is that ending the ethanol mandate will drastically reduce the hundreds of thousands of illegal invaders that work on these corn farms.
Another point to remember is that his opposition to public employee unions was actually quite nuanced to enable him to pass the reforms he achieved. He was careful to go for the big fish while letting the little ones, the police and fire unions, off. That move enabled him to get elected and pass his massive reform policy. Looks to me like he’s just done the same thing with ethanol. Renaldus Magnus was willing to do the same kind of thing to advance his program. Indeed, so was Lincoln.