I suppose that Peter Grier writes for a different audience than I do:
…some new ratings are out that we find pretty interesting. They’re from the “Crystal Ball” newsletter of the always quotable Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia Center for Politics. He chops the Republican field into layers, and in his top tier Dr. Sabato puts New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (No. 3, and falling); Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky (No. 2, and rising); and Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin (No. 1, and “huh”?).
…because I can safely assume that my audience knew all of this already. Admittedly, we’ve been preparing them to consider the possibility for some time.
Via Hot Air Headlines.
Moe Lane
PS: Emphasis on possibility. Let’s be honest: the 2016 election is still a goodly way away, and right now the only people talking and reading about it are political obsessives. Given that I am a political obsessive – and probably so are you, since you’re reading me – I’m hardly condemning the practice, but let’s not pretend that the next election will be settled this morning, month, or year. Scott Walker (and everybody else) will have plenty of opportunities to either explode on the scene, or implode on it.
I’m a Scott Walker guy too.
.
If Marco Rubio was smart, he sit out 2016 POTUS race completely and just run for reelection (under Florida law, he can’t do both). Then in 2018, run for governor. Get executive experience and then run for POTUS.
And put the distance of time behind his boneheaded amnesty move last year.
I have a great idea. He could suddenly reverse himself and come out in favor of “building the damn fence” at which point the usual suspects will fall all over themselves trying to convince us he means it.
*squints at Skip* Skippy?
We should be so lucky.
.
But if we are, I’m sure I’m not the only one with shenanigans that deserve being added to the list.
I’m a Mike Pence/ Scott Walker guy.
I’d love to see a ticket with either one or both.
So right now the only moderate, establishment Republican with any tea party support at all is Walker. My felling is that the RINO leadership cadre would be sorta ok with him because he’s almost one of them, but they’d really prefer to instead have a candidate with zero tea party cred. So my question is, will the crony corporatist core nuke him to try and get their preferred guy in? We’ll know this is happening when stuff starts being leaked that’s unverifiable – probably from the ex-McCain/Romney team. I’d guess the probability of this happening at about 80 percent or so.
.
Assuming that happens and he doesn’t fight it off it will be a dogfight between the tea party base and the crony core, and I am absolutely certain that if the base wins they will do everything possible to ensure that we lose in the general.
Walker isn’t a moderate.
Of course he is. You don’t get elected in a blue state as a Republican unless you are at a minimum moderate, or like Christie and Bloomberg, downright liberal.
No Walker isn’t a moderate. Wisconsin is only a slightly blue state. Conservatives can in fact get elected.
For example Ron Johnson.
A state that chooses Barack Obama over a moderate John McCain by 13 points and after four years of failure chooses Obama over a moderate Romney by seven points is not “slightly blue” under any rational definition of the term. The last time it went Republican for president was the 49 state landslide by Reagan in 84, 30 years ago! It’s not Massachusetts, but do you honestly think that Walker would win his home state against Hillary? It’s delusional to think so.
.
There were attempts to convince me that Romney was conservative, and the all-in for McCain was what drove me away from redstate in the first place. The claims that Walker’s a conservative against my lying eyes sound very familiar.
Jindal is my guy.
But I could happily pull the lever for Walker.
.
I’m wary of Rand Paul, but I could be persuaded.
.
Christie? Bush III? Not even if Satan himself was running on the other ticket.
Most of the public hasn’t heard of Scott Walker. That’s because our Betters in the media haven’t found a way to demonize him yet, so they’d prefer to simply ignore him rather than report his record.
Indeed, if Walker were a moderate the media would be pushing him out in front of everybody as and example of a “reasonable Republican” to shame those Tea Partiers.
Walker like Jindal refuses to play those games and I respect them both for it.
It’s much, much too early for anyone who doesn’t do politics for a living to be declaring anyone ‘my guy’ or ruling anyone plausible nominee as someone they could not support. A lot can happen in the next two years; I don’t know who’s going to have money, organization, an actual desire to be president, and a platform I can get behind by the time I have to make a decision (and it’ll probably be all over but the shouting by the CA primary anyway).
Sure we can.
In fact, we have the obligation to do so.
.
I don’t care what Christie does over the next two years.
I will not vote for the sonofabiscuit.
The leopard will not change his spots. No matter how he tries to position himself as a “severe conservative”.
He is anti-gun. Pro-abortion. And wants to expand the federal government.
He’s worse than useless.
And I will not vote for him.
.
On the flipside, declaring someone “my guy” is to take an informed stance, and have a reasoned position on who is the best candidate to advance the causes near and dear to your heart. In my case, that’s Jindal. Which is different from stating that no other candidate can advance my principles. If Walker, for instance, proves himself better able to advance my principles than Jindal, I’m jumping bandwagons.
.
And, to note the obvious, we know d*mned well how is going to have the money and the organization. It’s going to be this year’s version of Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, and Romney. Another fricking squish who will actively work against the principles that I want advanced.
Also, anyone willing to endure the expense and humiliation of throwing their hat into the ring clearly desires to be President. (Despite fabricated stories and concern trolling by Ben Smith.)
As to the party platform, it hasn’t noticeably changed since 1980. That doesn’t imply the few Republican winners felt any obligation to abide by it, because they clearly didn’t.