Behold, the difference between leadership and money - and the rank ignorance of the enemy media:
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is the clear favorite of conservative voters as he readies an expected bid for the Republican Party's presidential nomination in 2016, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.
He's the twenty-first century Reagan, a crossover candidate who can rally all wings of the GOP and carry the party back to the White House.
Unless he follows the usual sabotaging media advice:
Walker has gained little traction among the moderate voters who account for the majority of the party, the poll shows. But his strength on the right gives him a good base of support, analysts said.
"It's never bad to be the most conservative guy in a Republican primary fight - he could win the nomination that way. The question is can he do so in a way that does not alienate moderates?" said David Yepsen, director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University.
First of all, Mr. Yepsen, "moderates" do NOT account for the majority of the Republican party. They are an atrophied winglet whose importance and influence "analysts" like you always exaggerate in order to ensure the nomination of national candidates your party can more easily defeat. A dismal reality that has afflicted Republicans for a generation, and which Scott Walker is the man to change.
Secondly, remember where Governor Walker comes from: Wisconsin. Birthplace of "progressivism". Not a swing State, but an at least "powder blue" State.that hasn't voted Republican in a presidential election since 1984. And Scott Walker has been elected, re-elected, and re-re-elected there all in the past four and half years, despite vicious, ferocious Democrat opposition. If "alienating moderates" were one of Walk's tendencies, he wouldn't be the conservative Republican frontrunner today, because he'd have been sent back to mowing his front yard long ago. Rather, he has the Reaganian magic of luring moderates rightward. That's how conservative governing coalitions are made.
Thirdly, he knows that the path to the nomination does not run through the media, or "Republican consultants":
Republican strategists said Walker could pick up more support among moderates once he formally enters the race and voters start paying closer attention. But several questioned whether he will hold up to scrutiny, noting that he has already fumbled questions on evolution, religion and foreign policy.
He didn't "fumble" anything; he gave honest, disarming conservative answers instead of fleeing to the "moderate" tall grass, as these "Republican strategists" would have had him do. "Strategists" that have elected one GOP president in the past quarter-century.
And who think that money is all a "moderate froutrunner" needs to "crush" their conservative opposition:
Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush's super PAC plans to raise as much money as possible in the final days of the first fundraising period, with the aim to "weaponize" its fundraising, according to the New York Times.
"We want to weaponize our number," said Mike Murphy, head of the PAC, told donors on a Wednesday conference call. "The press has set a very high expectation for us, much higher than we would have set for ourselves."
"We are very, very focused on the next two weeks."
Bush told supporters in Miami a few weeks ago that he had already raised more money than any other Republican in modern history, the Times said....
"We want to maximize our crushing advantage there as a sign of strength," he said, according to the Times. [emphases added]
I return you to the Pevensie Principle: "Money does not win an election, but it sure does help". It's always better to have a massive warchest than for the coffers to be bare. But it's better still to have a candidate that inspires and energizes, who has actually accomplished things in the near-term that desperately need doing at the national level, who can rally the country to his banner. Such a candidate will be stronger, even with modest funding, than will a loaded candidate who pisses in the face of the voters whose votes he needs, who inspires nobody and aggravates many, whose surname is universally radioactive for any number of different reasons, and who, plainly and simply, cannot win.
There is a reason why I refer to Hillary Clinton as the Jeb Bush of the Democrat Party, and Jeb Bush as the Hillary Clinton of the GOP. They're carbon copies of each other: horrible candidates, dynastic fops with stratospheric sense of personal entitlement, grating stiffs who couldn't draw flies with a fleet of manure wagons, whom their party bases want slightly less than mutated ebola, and who are relying on a ton of money to paper over all those deficiencies.
And it will not work, other than if Republicans suicidally nominate the one "hopeful" Mrs. Clinton can defeat.
And I ain't referring to Scott Walker.
No comments:
Post a Comment