RedState’s Erickson praises Cruz choice for chief of staff
It’s Chip Roy, who was the chief ghostwriter for Rick Perry’s Fed Up! Erickson is especially impressed that Cruz did not turn to a K Street lobbying firm for a chief, as many new members do. Erickson writes:
[The decision] signals Senator-Elect Ted Cruz is not going to Washington sell out the conviction he ran on, but actually, as we’ve all known, does believe in federalism, the tenth amendment, and limited government.
What I find revealing about the choice of Roy is that Cruz–who has been making noise as a potential contender for the White House in 2016–appears to be putting his chips on the tea party as the future of the Republican party. In doing so, he is aligning himself with insurgents like Rand Paul and, of course, the chief insurgent, Jim DeMint, who helped fund Cruz’s Senate race.
Is this a good bet? I’m dubious. The tea party has a lot in common with the old Ross Perot “United We Stand” bunch. These groups seldom have staying power. Granted, the Kochs’ involvement makes the tea party’s survival more likely, at least in the short run, but in the establishment almost always prevails. It may prove to be the case, though, that Cruz is so appealing that he can transcend the factionalism in the Republican party. The strength of the Republican field in 2016 is that it is filled with big names: Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Mitch Daniels, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee. Only Rubio and Cruz qualify as fresh faces, though, and that might be where the rank-and-file look first.
Tagged: Ted Cruz
Texian Politico says:
Comparing the Tea Party movement to Ross Perot’s defunct United We Stand group is just silly. How many members elected to congress in 1994 claimed to be there because of United We Stand? I can’t think of one. In fact, Perot went out of his way to endorse Ann Richards in ’94 in her race against Bush and we know how that turned out. United We Stand was simply a Perot created vehicle. The Tea Party, whether some want to admit it or not, is much bigger and more nebulous.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
The tea party will be even stronger in 2014.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
December 5th, 2012 at 9:57 pm
No, it won’t.
Reply »
Blue Dogs Reply:
December 7th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Burka, on the governorships: the Democrats will likely win back Virginia in 2013 with McAuliffe due to infighting among the VA GOP and New Jersey will re-elect Christie as governor, who will win by massive double digits.
In 2014, I expect the GOP to add to their total in Governor’s Mansions including picking up Arkansas (Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe is term-limited) and with the AR GOP in full control of both chambers of the General Assembly, the Republicans are poised to have a big night on all statewide offices.
Reply »
jpt51 says:
The Tea Party may be popular in the Lone Star State for a few more years but Republicans must realize last month’s election involved tectonic changing voting patterns and demographics. Having a Hispanic face reiterating the usual party line positions isn’t going to work. Sooner, rather than later, Republicans will pay the price for their pandering to the 1% and left wandering in the wilderness for generations. Like their symbol the elephant, voters will not soon forget which party enabled special interests to run the state for twenty years.
Reply »
Texian Politico Reply:
December 3rd, 2012 at 1:48 pm
Cruz ran an average of 2-3 points better than Romney in heavily Hispanic counties in Texas. How do you explain that?
Reply »
Dollars and Sense Reply:
December 3rd, 2012 at 4:30 pm
please provide county names and numbers showing gross votes cast as well as percentages.
Reply »
Texian Politico Reply:
December 4th, 2012 at 9:33 am
You can go to the SoS page for the raw votes.
November 28th, 2012 at 3:45 pm
Texian Politico says:
Ok, no one else has done it, so I did. It seems that Cruz being an Hispanic helped him a pretty good deal in TX over Romney in Hispanic areas. They each got about the same percentage of the vote statewide (57%), but let’s look at large heavily Hispanic counties in Texas -
El Paso – Romney 33% Cruz 36%
Bexas (San Antonio) Romney 47% Cruz 46%
Harris (Houston) Romney 49% Cruz 50%
Cameron (Brownsville) Romney 33% Cruz 39%
Nueces (Corpus Christi) Romney 51% Cruz 51%
Hidalgo (McAllen) Romney 29% Cruz 31%
In that six county sample Cruz was on average up two points on Romney – 42.2% to 40.3%. Two points is what about what Obama won by over Romney nationwide.
Cruz ran better in those areas than Romney, but he was down a few points in big conservative white counties like Collin and Montgomery when compared to Romney. I don’t know how that’s explained except by racism. It does seem to show that a certain segment of the voters on each side are voting for or against a surname.
Dave Reply:
December 4th, 2012 at 11:26 pm
Pretty funky math. If you look at the actual results, Romney got more votes in those six counties than Cruz did. A lot of the effect is due to undervote for Sadler. Cruz got a higher percentage than Romney in Harris, but still got fewer votes.
Blue Dogs Reply:
December 4th, 2012 at 9:48 am
Texian, what was Cruz’s performance among Latinos, Asians and Afro-Americans ?
I couldn’t find the full exit poll of the TX Senate election results on CNN’s 2012 election archives.
Reply »
Spiro Eagleton Reply:
December 4th, 2012 at 3:10 pm
I don’t think any exit polling was done in TX in this election, which yet one more reason to be wary of national exit poll numbers. Certainly Hispanics voted Democratic this year, but to give an exact number is insane. After all, it was exit polling in 2004 that showed that Kerry would easily beat Bush.
paulburka Reply:
December 5th, 2012 at 10:18 pm
Spiro is right. No one does exit polling in Texas. The results are a foregone conclusion.
paulburka Reply:
December 5th, 2012 at 9:58 pm
Cruz is popular. Romney isn’t.
Reply »
Elton McPhee Reply:
December 3rd, 2012 at 1:51 pm
The Tea Party is making a jackass out of our state. I say run the rascals off.
Reply »
Rose says:
Those “big names” are pretty scary if you are a woman with 2 kids. Going to be making more Democrats with that bunch.
Reply »
Indiana Pearl says:
Mitch Daniels will never run for president unless he gets a divorce from his current wife – too many skeletons in the closet.
Reply »
Blue Dogs Reply:
December 4th, 2012 at 9:49 am
Daniels is finished politically. Jeb Bush, Jindal, Christie are running.
Reply »
Spiro Eagleton Reply:
December 4th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
They are? I thought those were just rumors. I bet Sen. Paul runs.
Reply »
Blue Dogs Reply:
December 4th, 2012 at 4:05 pm
Christie is obviously running in 2016, which explains why he never mentioned Romney during the majority of his RNC keynote speech in Tampa.
He’ll easily win re-election as NJ governor in 2013 by a massive landslide.
Jeb Bush is waiting to see if Rubio runs or stays in the Senate.
Indiana Pearl Reply:
December 4th, 2012 at 7:55 pm
The Chinese Army and the Colt 45s are rumored to be running. Let’s see who actually steps up to the plate.
Lawrence Person says:
Wait, let me get this straight: A conservative Republican Senator-elect, who worked at a conservative think tank, ran as a conservative, courted conservatives, and beat the overwhelming favorite establishment candidate while pledging to govern as a conservative, has now chosen…a conservative chief of staff?
Inconceivable!
The idea that conservatives truly believe in low taxes, balanced budgets, and limited government seems entirely alien to Burka. When it comes to describing inter-Republican-Party dynamics, he’s like a color-blind man trying to describe The Wizard of Oz.
And so instead of reaching the obvious conclusion, that Ted Cruz chose a conservative chief of staff because he’s a conservative, Burka prefers to envision imaginary 2016 horse-race jockeying.
I could point him to several sources that would explain exactly why the Tea Party exists and what it wants, but I fear it would be like trying to teach the fundamentals of optics to a dog.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
December 5th, 2012 at 10:04 pm
The question about Cruz has always been whether he would align with DeMint and the tea party extremists or the Senate’s mainstream conservatives. Apparently the choice was very important to RedState, or they would not have written about it. I’m interested in which faction Cruz will ultimately side with, the establishment or the tea party. If he has chosen the tea party, that says something important about Cruz. It also raises the question, as I wrote, if Cruz aligned himself with the wrong side, at least from the viewpoint of history.
Reply »
donuthin says:
Alien to me also as I can’t remember them ever actually balancing the budget except by creating debt, ignoring maintenance of infrastructure, ignoring basic needs for an expanding population such as water, highways and education. Real conservatives take care of business.
Reply »
Really Burka? says:
Good commentary. Roy seems to be a smart guy, and I like the fact that he is not green but he is not from K Street. It’s a good balance. Cruz picked his chief of staff based on his personal views and political leanings, and found a person with experience. Whether good or bad for the party I think that is good for Senator-Elect Cruz.
Reply »
Bridget Blueskye says:
The most important part of Burka’s analysis concerns the libertarian insurgency happening inside the Repub party now. I’m pleased Burka has nailed it for what it is and is following it. It was the libertarian vote in Texas, combined with the previously stealth libertarian faction in DC, that elected Ted Cruz. Watch what is happening in the Repub party, as Boehner struggles to fight off the increasingly powerful Libertarian faction of his party.
Reply »
paulburka says:
It is not going to be easy. If Boehner continues to punish members for not following the party line, the friends of the members who were removed from committees are going to make life very uncomfortable for the speaker.
Reply »
rw says:
The last two presidential elections the ‘establishment’ candidates were John McCain and Mitt Romney – neither of whom fired up the base enough to drive voters to the polls.
Reply »
Blue Dogs Reply:
December 7th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Had the GOP nominated Jeb in 2012, he would have easily beaten Obama. I mean the Republicans wasted an opportunity to take out an incumbent, unpopular president with a weak economy and horrible foreign policy.
Reply »