GOP Gov. Scott Walker from Wisconsin
A Republican presidential star was born this week, and it wasn’t Jeb Bush. On Monday, an
Iowa poll put Wisconsin governor Scott Walker in the lead in Iowa. His margin among other GOP hopefuls was the slimmest of slim, getting just 15 percent of the share to edge out Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul at 14 percent with Mike Huckabee claiming third at 10 percent.
But the most significant takeaway was the fact that Walker's star rose 10 points from his four percent finish in Quinnipiac’s poll last October. That was before he made his big speech at the Iowa "freedom" summit a couple weekends ago. In other words, his message resonated with voters there—putting him at the front of the GOP’s upstart candidates, not to be confused with the Party’s current establishment pick, Jeb Bush.
Bush also made his debut this week. As one might expect from an establishment candidate—his speech wasn't nearly as splashy. He didn’t make any huge gaffes. He talked about offering “a new vision,” saying more Americans are “stuck at their income levels than ever before.” And he repeatedly invoked the age-old Republican theme of getting government out of the way of citizens.
“The right to rise,” he said, “depends on a government that makes it easier to work than not work.”
The word cloud looked something like this: he used “middle class” and “income” three times each, “conservative” four times, and “Americans” 10 times; but the word that dominated his speech, and not in a good way, was “government” at 17 mentions (or 19, if you include “governmental”). He never once used the word “wage.”
Both of these candidates should worry progressives in their own way. Bush is a die-hard conservative who aims to streamline government by gutting it. But he is putting off whiffs of "moderation" by doing things like calling for “respect” among “the good people on all sides” of the same-sex marriage debate. In fact, in a field of right-wing candidates like Rand Paul and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Bush will often be portrayed as the moderate by default.
Head below the fold to find out more on this story.
Scott Walker, on the other hand, has a sleepy-eyed Midwestern demeanor that completely belies how dangerous he really is. He is a governor on a crusade to drain government of every resource imaginable, residents of his state be damned. He has handily won three elections in the past five years, including a recall vote held halfway through his first term.
He's also a prolific fundraiser, reports Matea Gold at the Washington Post:
In all, Walker raised almost $83 million for his three statewide races in the past four years — an eye-popping sum for a governor of a modest-size Midwestern state. Of the nearly 300,000 people who gave to his campaigns, three out of four donated $75 or less, according to people familiar with the figures.
After winning his second term, the
“pro-life, no exceptions” governor
said this upon taking the stage:
“First off, I want to thank God. I want to thank God for his abundant grace and mercy,” Walker continued. “Win or lose, it is more than sufficient for each and every one of us.”
In many ways, he's the whole conservative package and he's fresh—fresher than Bush.
But here’s what’s most troubling for progressives about this week: While GOP candidates are field testing their messages—some dazzling and some not so much—Hillary Clinton isn’t testing much.
The current conventional wisdom among most Democratic pundits is that it's brilliant for Hillary to wait on entering the race. It keeps her above politics and out of the fray. Some conservatives have countered that staying out makes her seem aloof.
But who cares what the pundits think? History matters. The last time Hillary Clinton ran, it took her nearly a year to find her voice, to connect with voters, and that was at least one week too late.
By the time Hillary Clinton stood before New Hampshire voters on Jan. 8, 2008, and told them, “I have listened to you, and in the process I found my own voice,” the fate of her campaign was already sealed.
Thus far, we have gotten glimpses of Hillary Clinton, through her book tour and campaign speeches she gave for Democratic candidates in 2014. It has been less than perfect. On the issue of marriage equality—which should be an easy get for Democrats—Clinton went at it last June with NPR interviewer Terry Gross, who repeatedly questioned her motivations for changing her stance on same-sex marriage.
When Clinton was asked about it again the following week by Christiane Amanpour, her answer was much smoother.
"I think evolved is the word that a lot of people have used," she said at a CNN town hall on Tuesday. "It fits me as well as it fits others. In large measure based on the experiences that I had with so many people who I knew and cared about."
While stumping
last October, she took a clumsy try at some Elizabeth Warren-infused populism.
“Don’t let anybody tell you that corporations and businesses create jobs,” she told a crowd in Boston.
The following week at a New York rally,
her message was a little more polished.
“Our economy grows when businesses and entrepreneurs create good-paying jobs here in America and workers and families are empowered to build from the bottom up and the middle out — not when we hand out tax breaks for corporations that outsource jobs or stash their profits overseas.”
The point is, it takes time to build a candidate, regardless of how qualified the candidate or
how advantaged she is in the polls. And making those mistakes now will be far more forgettable and forgivable to voters than it will be next year.
Hillary Clinton needs to take the stage soon and she needs a primary if she's ultimately going to beat a Republican who's been stumping for nearly two years.