Month: January 2016

There should be a piece up in tomorrow’s American Thinker that makes the case that if Cruz wins Iowa he should also win New Hampshire.  If he does, that would probably be good for a win in South Carolina as well, with momentum and all.  If Cruz were to win Nevada, three days after South Carolina, he’d be four for four going into March 1st, Super Tuesday.  He could easily take six of the eight states that are up that day, at which point he’d have something like a lock on the nomination.

The path I’m suggesting Cruz take in New Hampshire is not available to anyone else.  Only he can take it, if he so chooses.  So writing a column about it doesn’t give some other campaign an idea. But I have an idea for Nevada that any candidate could use.  I happen to think it would win Nevada for either Rubio or Cruz if they picked up on it.  It’s really quite good.  If anyone in the Cruz campaign is interested, give me a call.

Looking ahead, I’m trying to think of the attacks the D’s will make on Cruz.  Frank Bruni in the NYT says he’s cruel.  Man, are they going to be coming after him.  He’s lucky in his family.  His stalwart wife and two little girls are his best line of defense.  It’s a strain on everyone involved, but Heidi Cruz and her daughters should be with him as much as possible.

It’s going to be tricky going after his religion.  It’s going to be very difficult for the Stephen Colberts of this world to refrain from mocking his devout Christianity.  A couple days ago he told his volunteers that in order to awaken and energize the body of Christ and win the election, they must strap on the full armor of God.

Evangelical Christians are genuinely inspired by this sort of language.  It makes a lot of secular types uncomfortable.  They think it’s bringing religion into politics, but, of course, it’s not.  It’s just inspiring your volunteers.  Nonetheless, the left is certain to mock and sneer at this sort of thing.  In strictly political terms, that’s really stupid.  But they can’t help themselves.  Advantage: us.

Ted Cruz is a militant Christian.

So was John F. Kennedy.

Evolution’s not fair.  So the left hates it.

Matt Ridley’s The Evolution of Everything claims that things just happen.  Nobody plans them.  Progress is made through trial and error, not central planning.

It’s a libertarian mindset that I find appealing.  The internet  is the best example  — hugely important, incredibly complex, and an exercise in spontaneity.  And, naturally, unfair, as is all of life, and all of evolution.  The unfit, through no fault of their own, do not survive.

Leftism is about making things fair, come hell or high water.   Great power is required in the service of fairness.  Nature is not fair, and fairness is not natural.  So the power of the state is needed to bend man and society into what’s fair.

It’s everywhere.  The campaign against microaggression is the most extreme example.  Everything the University and academia have always stood for must be sacrificed in order to eradicate the unfairness of white privilege.

This sort of thing gets a reaction.  It did in 1968.  It very well may this year as well.  This wind can help build the tide.

The big story of the 20th century is the failure of planning, and the success of evolution.  So says Ridley.  I think he’s right.  And success in the 21st century will come from evolution  — freedom  — and not from planning.  The young people of today may not understand that yet.  But I think they will.  If the next Republican President and Congress institute the kinds of reforms that are needed to unleash the pent up economic engine of America, the ensuing prosperity will be the proof positive.  These people will need to deliver.  If they don’t, we may not get another chance.

It’s always important to listen to what the opposition tells you is in your best interest.  Then you know what not to do.  Take Billy Jeff.  The Democrats say Trump is making a big mistake in dredging up all his predatory behavior.  It will make people sympathize with Hillary.

If you’re the kind of Republican who listens to this swill, you’re a loser.  Hillary’s conduct in all this was despicable.  It reveals her as a truly loathsome person.  This story needs to be told.

Thinking back to the 60’s, it’s amazing how the left hasn’t changed.  I didn’t really know guys like Jerry Rubin and Mario Savio, but I met them, and figured them out.  These kids today aren’t any different.

It’s funny, the first political activity I was involved in was the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley in 1963.  It was a right/left alliance.

For free speech.

Maybe things have changed.

538.com divides the Republican electorate into five partially overlapping rings:  moderate, establishment, Christian conservative, Tea Party, and libertarian.  But this year there’s a sixth ring, and it’s distinct.  It’s Trump people.  Actually, a lot of them aren’t even Republicans, according to Nate Cohn.

There are enough of them to give the nomination to anyone but Trump.  A strong majority of Republicans are adamantly opposed to the Donald, they control the party apparatus, and they will be able to coalesce around a candidate or a strategy to deny Trump the Republican nomination.  One of the big questions this year is, then what?

This question will most likely come up in New Hampshire, a week after Trump loses Iowa.

And lose Iowa he will, by a large margin.  It’s hard to imagine a state more unsuited to Trump than Iowa.  Trump’s all Noo Yahk, Noo Yahk, swag, braggadocio, insults, showmanship.  That’s not Iowa, at all.  Look at Sen. Joni Ernst  — fresh faced, cheerfully castrating hogs.  She’s nice.  That’s Iowa.

New Hampshire Trump voters, and Trump himself, will be confronted by the fact that he’s a loser.  He lost.  It wasn’t close.  How many will bail?  And where would they go?  Mostly to Cruz.

And with Paul disappearing, Cruz should pick up some libertarian votes, too.  Carson’s campaign just blew up, so some of those New Hampshire evangelicals may go to Cruz as well.

When you think about it, it’s pretty neat political trick to be the candidate of both the Christian conservatives and the libertarians.  Two very different types of people.  But that’s what Cruz is doing.  Just like Reagan did.

The more I think about it, the better Ted Cruz’s chances in New Hampshire get.  I’m about finished with my AT article for Monday.  It makes a whole lot of sense to me.  Cruz may not have thought of this angle himself.  He’s a very busy guy, and has a million things to think about.

I can hardly overstate my optimism for 2016.  I feel more confident than I ever have in my life.  But I’m too involved to be impartial.  Only time will tell.

And the time is coming.

Peak American leftism occurred in October of 2013, with the rollout of Obamacare.  If it had succeeded, and tens of millions of Americans suddenly became entitled to a costly new benefit, it could have been game over.

That’s the way I felt about it.  The only way to pay for it would have been European levels of taxation.  American exceptionalism, and the Constitution itself, would have been fond memories.  I take politics personally, and was very depressed.

When Obamacare was revealed as a fiasco the political tide in this country turned.  The elections of 2014 and 2015 are precursors of a once in a century political tide, rivaling the smashing victory of 1920.

There are a variety of forces at work in the swelling of this tide.  One of the most important is the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton.

She is a woman of only middling intellect.  I mean, come on, who fails the D. C. bar exam?  Her record as Secretary of State is truly abysmal, the smoldering ruins of Benghazi, and the chaos of Libya, are monuments to her ineptitude.  She has been established as a stone faced liar, to the families of American heroes, no less.  Her one attempt at domestic policy  – Hillarycare  — was a complete and utter failure.  She was a terrible candidate in 2008, and she ‘s much worse now.  In her personal life, she has been an enabler of a sexual predator.  People don’t like her, and they don’t trust her.

And she’s going to be elected President?  What, are you nuts?

So what have we got going on our side?  It’s easy to see who’s for real, and who’s a phony.  What’s their position on ethanol?  Anything other than opposition to this mind boggling boondoggle means you’re not serious.  You’re whoring after Big Corn’s Iowa votes.  Back in ’08 McCain wouldn’t do it, so he just skipped Iowa.   Of the current field of twelve, only two have been honest enough to oppose ethanol: Cruz and Paul.  Everybody else, most especially Donald Trump, is doing some form of the Iowa Pander.

The stakes are high.  If Cruz wins Iowa it means you can be honest about ethanol and still get through Iowa.  And if Cruz is elected President, the end of ethanol will come very soon.  So Big Corn is unleashing an ad blitz against Cruz, joined by some others.  Who knows, it could work.

But if it doesn’t work, and Cruz does get elected, it means we’ve got a candidate who had the brains and the guts to call out the ethanol lobby in Iowa.  To me, that’s a tell.  This guy means business.

When I first detected the turn of the tide some two years ago, I knew we would need a leader.  I had no idea who it would be.  I didn’t think the identity of the leader was necessarily that important.  It turns out it looks like it’s Cruz.  That’s fine by me.  There’s a chance he could be a great President.  If he gets done what he wants to get done, he would be.

All of this, of course, bodes well for the Reagan Project, which is dedicated to the promotion of Article V of the Constitution.  This tide is big enough for us, too.

I must end the calendar year with a prediction:  2016 is going to be one hell of a year.

HNY