Mr. Walker argues that Wisconsin offers a lesson to his party nationally. “The perception of many across America is Republicans in Washington are the party of ‘no,’ they’re just against things,” he said in an interview. “We shouldn’t be about austerity. We should be about reform. We should spell out a clear message about how we’re going to reform things. I think what voters are hungry for in battleground states is leadership.”...
If the other Republicans in the Rust Belt are trying to moderate their message, Mr. Walker in Wisconsin argues that independent voters do not want Republicans to move to the center....
“I argue the way you win the center, which is key to winning battleground states, is not to run to the center; it’s to lead, it’s to be bold,” he said.
February 12, 2014
The NYT takes aim at the Republican Governors — including Scott Walker — who are running for re-election in 2014.
"Mr. Walker is one of eight Republican governors facing re-election who swept into office in 2010 in states that President Obama won two years earlier, driven by the Tea Party at the height of its influence. Mr. Obama clawed back in 2012 to win each state again."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
24 comments:
It's to lead and be bold and to stay away from social conservatism.
More than several members of the Legislature haven't done this, of course, because they're suckling up to the Anti-Abortion funding teat, which requires you to do something about abortion. (Short of banning it, of course, because then the Republicans wouldn't know how to fund-raise).
Good thing corporations can give unlimited amounts to political campaigns! Perhaps the NYT should be a little more honest about it's intentions.
Obama, with the help of the media, clawed back in in 2012
FIFY
The view from midtown.
Is Walker "facing" re-election or running for re-election? The Times makes it sound like he is in trouble for something he did.
In a race between what are effectively two Democrats, the authentic Democrat (the one with the "D" after the name) will always win.
The TEA Party is still a pervasive ideal. More people than ever oppose progressive taxation without accountability. It's the corruption, stupid.
Are other Republicans in the "Rust Belt" moderating their messages? Doubly dismissive: Walker is way out there, even among those out there in the crusty Rust Belt!
While I think it is either ignorant or dishonest (depending) to portray the Republican Party as the party of "no", it is partly the Republicans' fault that the Democrats get away with this framing (just as it is partly the Republican's' fault that the Democrats get away with calling Republicans "anti-women"). They need to stop letting the Democrats decide what the Republicans will talk about, need to stop reacting to the Democratic agenda.
How about totally ignoring something the Democrats say and instead propose a program and get out and explain and support it? It worked pretty well for Ronald Reagan, it work pretty well for Newt Gingrich. It will work again, at least for the Republicans who actually do believe in something.
Oh, and this is A1 material in the NYT?! I would have guessed this to be an obscure online only piece.
What's wrong in being the party of no? Perhaps the Republican's should run proudly as the party of no such as no more robbing the taxpayers. No more mandating how you live.
Obama, with the help of the media, clawed back in in 2012
The media, particularly the NYT, ARE his claws.
The premise of the article is fatuous--but that's what the NYTimes needs to do to keep the Upper West Side from getting restless.
The four states have incumbent Republican governors. Their immediate predecessors might've been Dems, but that makes the "up for grabs" analysis four years past its sell-by date. And it makes the "once solidly Democratic" distinction rather selective as a generation ago Reagan handily carried those states. Seems like the states are far closer to toss-up, as regards party control, as the governor's mansion has switched back and forth. Once solidly must mean if you blink, you'll miss it.
At the federal level, where Republicans hold only the House, "no" is the only bargaining power they have.
Why shouldn't they use it?
Walker is doing things that are putting his state on more solid financial ground. That is not the case with republicans in the house and senate. Walker is acting like a conservative. Republicans in congress are pursuing big government policies (farm bill subsidies anyone? Or the budget they passed that was MORE than what the dems were okay with?). We need more Walker and less republican big government hypocrites.
Of course they do; they're the NYT!
PB Reader, I think NYT's intentions are quite clear.
Walker is doing things that are putting his state on more solid financial ground
No he's not.
garage mahal said...
Walker is doing things that are putting his state on more solid financial ground
No he's not.
Yes he is.
I thought garage deserved an 'intelligent' reply to his pronouncement...
The Sulzbergers are Democrats. What do you expect them to publish?
Walker is doing things that are putting his state on more solid financial ground
No he's not.
Uh huh. Yeah he is.
I don't live in WI, but my underatanding is he has cut taxes and spending, and specifically cut public debt and is bringing in private investment that will lead to much more job growth in the near future - albeit his job growth to date is pretty piss poor. Can anyone comment on how accurate this summary of mine is?
I don't live in WI, but my underatanding is he has cut taxes and spending, and specifically cut public debt and is bringing in private investment that will lead to much more job growth in the near future - albeit his job growth to date is pretty piss poor. Can anyone comment on how accurate this summary of mine is?
Manufacturing will continue to migrate to Dixie or outside the USA from Rust Belt states such as WI, unless and until Wisconsin becomes a Right to Work state.
The height of Tea Party influence may just be when the GOP regains the Senate and nominates someone decent (like Gov Walker) whom the NYT is likely to call extremist.
But it's instructive that the supposed "height" of influence was just before the IRS and other agencies adopted a mission of stiffling the Tea Party. You'd think the NYT would consider such an angle.
Post a Comment