Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Cruz Will Lose
I am just stating it now, for the record. Mind you, this is not a reflection on the character of the man, on his abilities, or on how great a president he would be if he would win the White House. No, I’m simply stating that he will not win the White House in the first place.
But first let me begin with some observations, caveats, and warnings. Back in the waning days of 2011 — and in the early days of 2012 — I expressed similar doubts about Romney. I (and others here) said that he would not be able to beat Obama in the general election, only to met with a variety of statements* that assumed we had it out for Romney. Recent tentative remarks by me about Cruz have been met with similar counter-arguments, generally to the effect of swapping out “Mormons” for “Texans.” So, to get this out of the way I will state that: This isn’t about Texas or Texans; This is not about faith; If Cruz gets the nomination, I will certainly vote for him; I neither like nor dislike him.
(And no, I don’t have a favorite candidate in the primaries. I’m in Ohio, and my primary vote will be worthless by the time I get to cast it, as it has in every other primary since I’ve been born.)
That said, I’ll get down to why I believe that the Cruz candidacy is unlikely to cross the finish line come November (and keep in mind that I’d love to be proven wrong.
First, there is Cruz’s personality and speaking style. He is a great speaker when speaking to the base on basic matters, but his tone and delivery are — especially if you are not already inclined to agree with him — abrasive and preachy. When discussing him with the less politically minded (i.e., centrists, moderates, irregular voters, blue-collar Democrats), the common remark I hear is that he sounds like a fire and brimstone preacher of the old school. I’ve also heard him likened unfavorably to televangelists of the sort that ask for money. First impressions are hard to shake, and a lot of people already have a negative view of Cruz because he sounds like the stereotypical “judgmental, repressive, Republican fat-cat lawyer” so often used as a villain trope in movies and television. He has less than a year to change this impression, but he is still playing to that type.
The fact is that, candidates are judged on their personalities as much as on issues. They must present public personality that people can both identify and like. George W. Bush seemed like an affable and sincere sort of guy, especially compared to Kerry and Gore. Bill Clinton oozed charisma, especially against the elderly Dole. In 2008, Obama came across as the cool, but deeply passionate and hip student council president against the cranky and erratic McCain; four years later, he modified his persona as the world-weary-yet-still-loving father against the stilted and uncaring tycoon of Romney. Dukakis, Mondale, and Carter speak for themselves (Carter still speaking way too much). What persona is Cruz offering to America? An angry and smart know-it-all.
My second concern is that I suspect Cruz’s tactics in the general election will be deeply flawed. We should be honest in our appraisal of the American electorate: it is moved not by intellectual debate but by moral and emotional suasion of the right sort. By “the right sort” I mean that the candidate has to cast himself as a national savior or hero, and his opponent as bumbler, fool, or monster. Intellectual and economic arguments can play a part in this, but only if they serve this hero narrative. Romney failed at both of these. Cruz has been great as putting himself forward as a Savior Of The Party — or, as a Rebel Against the Party — but this is wrongheaded when the Republican Party is itself pretty well despised. It buys you nothing as your appeal must be as the National Hero. Again, Cruz has less than a year to pivot on this.
And Cruz’s instinct would, I suspect, be to attack Hillary Clinton as a Leftist Villain. Unfortunately this has been tried repeatedly against both her and her husband, and it has never worked outside of conservative circles. You can try to make her out as all types of villains — a liar, a thief, a power-monger, a Stalinist — and it will never take with those whom we must convince, and we just look like bullies for trying. The better way to cast her is as a hack, a bumbler, or a fool, a subject of mockery and derision, and Cruz is (I suspect) incapable of doing that. It’s the lawyer’s instinct in him: he wants to win against her in an election as he would against her in a court of law. Yet, if he should campaign that way (as a prosecutor), the moderates will rally around her muttering “Sure we all know she did it, but just can’t convict her, not with the way that lawyer was going after her.” As one lawyer here on Rico told me, if you know you are innocent you should demand a bench trial; only ask for a jury trial if you’re guilty.
That’s why I don’t think Cruz can win next November. If you think I’m wrong — and I’d love to be wrong! — let me know why my concerns above are incorrect, and please note that I don’t have any personal issue with Cruz or any problem with candidates being from Texas. I understand the passion Cruz engenders in his fans, but all of our candidates are imperfect beings with vulnerabilities. I’m no party traitor in pointing out the particular ones of Cruz (and under no obligation to do the same for other candidates), and if he does survive the primaries then he’ll need to pivot hard and fast to meet Hillary.
I just don’t think he’ll pull it off.
Published in Politics
Cruz must not be our nominee. We must stop thinking about how much we like him and see him through the eyes of the rest of the voters, the voters who aren’t us. He will never never win a general election, not even against the worst candidate they could come up with. He is reptilian, unctuous, unattractive in every way, and seems to be lecturing tolerantly to mentally slow 5-year-olds. Also he has a high reedy voice that does not sound masculine. Do NOT vote for this man in the primaries!
A brilliant bit of jiu-jitsu to lock in the Cruz supporters! How could anyone with any sympathy for the man or his (poll-tested, to be sure) positions do anything but dig in their heels in the face of this baseless and unfair attack. Bravo!
Are these not integral to presidential politics? Like it or not, style matters for candidates electability. Kennedy beat Nixon, Reagan beat Carter and Mondale, Clinton beat Bush and Dole, Bush beat Gore and Kerry. Why? Style.
Stop seeing him through the eyes of the already converted and see him through the eyes of those we must bring into the fold. I know it’s hard. If we don’t win back the White House this time around, no Republican ever will again in our lifetimes.
Skip is saying, lots of people Sen. Cruz needs to win do not like him: He needs to change the things that annoy them about his prosecutorial style, as well as the oleaginous manner. That’s the constructive part–Sen. Cruz really did know Texas rather well from personal experience, including politics. There is no comparable evidence that he knows what the country is like as a whole.
Gov. Walker apparently knows a lot about Wisconsin politics & impresses conservatives nationally with his achievements. He did not know much of anything about running campaigns in America…
Now, to go by Mr. Henry Olsen’s analysis of the GOP electorate, Sen. Cruz seems to believe he’s got the quarter or so of the party that’s fiscal conservative & religious conservative. He’s looking for wins in the South because it’s just more conservative, too. He stands no chance in New Hampshire or any other moderate / liberal place. But to look only at the South: How many states will have winner takes all rules for their delegates? These states seem to have preferred earlier voting in the primaries to making an impact by going all or most for one candidate. I suspect this rule change alone will cost Sen. Cruz the nomination.
Let me add that Sec. Knight of the sad visage Kerry is well cast both as a loser in a presidential election & the emissary of a floundering foreign policy. I’m not sure if what he touches turns to ashes or he’s just uncannily attracted to ashes, but anyway–ashen, that’s the point. Can he even speak with the dust unsettling?
We are in agreement on style. Ted Cruz style is off-putting to some including many Texans.
We haven’t had a primary or caucus yet and we are using personal/style attacks
areand ending the chances of a candidate in 3rd or 4th and trending positively in polls.If Ted Cruz is so horrible (some of his debate performance are teeth grinding) how does he maintain a slow/steady rise in the polls and raise the 2nd most amount of money?
Every article written on Ricochet about this subject was written years ago when he faced Dewhurst. If we want to bash a guy personally, that’s fine, we should just be intellectually honest and say it.
Right Angles, I agree. Some people are delusional, though, about the chances of
1. Anyone against Hillary. And I agree to an extent, she will not win easily.
2. The intelligence of the voters. Most won’t care how smart or principled he is.
3. The attractiveness factor.
Winning is the goal.
Good observation. He has already pivoted away or moderated some of his core principles and been taken to account by his early Texas supporters. Not sure it did any good, but your comment is very astute.
Jeb! has even more money & is even a worse candidate, not to say mindless as a candidate–Sen. Cruz has a long term plan or strategy, as does Sen. Rubio, it seems to me. Remember the two funny things conservatives used to say–including on Ricochet–1. Look at all the beautiful governors! 2. Let one thousand conservative flowers bloom in the debates & primaries!? One wonders how people could be so hopeful…
Anyone who would have beaten Governors Walker & Perry with their weaknesse upside the head until they woke up would have done them & the nation a great good. Skip is not going to wake Sen. Cruz up–but someone should, don’t you think? You are right that he is doing much better than most. He’s got a good chance to rid himself of the outsiders & to make it to the end. But what makes you think he can persuade the GOP electorate?
I would say a significant change of style is necessary to win just enough of what Mr. Henry Olsen calls somewhat conservatives-
I think it a fools errand to expect a mid 40’s sitting Senator, SCOTUS arguing and victorious Solicitor General, debate champion, and someone who memorized the Constitution as a teenager to change their speaking style based on ‘constructive’ criticism such as this.
He was even more uptight in the early Senate campaign. He is open minded and listens to folks. He improves with each debate, but there is a ceiling.
Interesting point. If that comes to pass I am not sure it is a bad thing in the long run.
Donald Trump is leading almost all of those polls – no one ever went broke telling the base they are awesome and you will fight for how awesome they are.
I never understand why us on the right want to toss people out of the race before anyone votes. We have been so condition by the media and conventional wisdom to eat our own because “moderates” and “independants” won’t vote for them. Although didn’t Romney win the independants and STILL lost the election?
Maybe actually appealing to the base might actually help us win. I don’t know, can we actually get through a single state primary before throwing people out.
Also what should we do to fight against Hilary? Not going on the attack didn’t work for Romney so to use that tactic again doesn’t seem very smart. Hilary is really vunerable the economy is in horrible shape (and people feel it) the world is on fire, and people are scared. This election won’t be like that of 2008 or 2012, I believe it’s a whole new ball game.
Good points. Cruz is my preference for now, but you might be right.
On the first point, about his personality, I would not publicly concur even though I often hear that complaint. The reason is that I don’t want to contribute to a bandwagon effect by which a perception of “common knowledge” encourages people to join that assumption. I don’t want to contribute to a self-fulfilling prophecy.
On Hillary, it might be effective to play passive-aggressive with her. A Republican could insinuate with a pleasant smile and soft voice problems that relate to her without directly addressing her. Or compliment her in some way that has nothing to do with her political actions before revealing her policy or experience to be worthless. In other words, keep the tone pleasant and aloof while undermining her.
Many people have bluntly stated (not thinking of Ricochet) over the years that they don’t like Texans or Southerners as candidates, yet such candidates get elected to national office anyway. This might be the sort of error common in polling. “Do you like [x] background?” or “Do you support [y] policy?” are different than “Would you support someone with [x] background and [y] policy if that candidate also had [a] experience and [b] policy?” Priorities and context can make many unfavorable qualities tolerable.
The emphasis on federalism and individual freedom, well explained can bring many people into the fold. The problem is that many of those we need to bring into the fold, don’t understand how big government inpacts them or they don’t connect the dots between big government and them, especially their wallets. They know that the DMV stinks, they hate paying taxes, they hate the fact they have to pay for anything BUT they need to have it explained to them how the free market and individual freedom allows them to have all the cool stuff that they enjoy.
Hipsters in Brooklyn LOVE their craft beer, specialty coffee shops and gastro pubs and seem to appreciate the entreprenuership that goes into building those types of businesses, but don’t see how stiffling the regulations are in starting those businesses. There is a movie out called Blood, Sweat and Beer that goes into how the Craft beer brewaries are reviliatizing run down neighborhoods, highlighting this is a good way to get the hipsters.
Because he can change both if he’s good enough. He’s a good courtroom lawyer, and thus also an actor. Can he play the more charismatic part convincingly? And my criticisms are not personal – if I called him names or denigrated his character (and I have notably done neither) – that would be personal.
Primary polls only – intra party, not national.
You are mistaking honest criticisms of his style for personal attacks. They are not personal. And why keep bringing up Dewhurst? Different race, different place, different time. He’s not facing Dewhurst this time.
This is definitely a good way to go after her.
Because every thing you are saying here about him was said when he ran against Dewhurst and your criticisms are personal attacks, but you whine about not being subject to the same yourself.
Aaron, if he gets the nomination, I hope you can be one of his advisors!
The GOP is not limited to a single message or a single messenger about Hillary.
The Dems destroy Republican candidates not because one person says he/she is a meanie, but because everyone (in the media and entertainment) says they are cunning satans and idiot racists and a thousand other incompatible lies 24/7 until the party panics and withdraws them or the votes have been counted.
Of course the conservative media (such as they are), having overcome the ‘purity test’ panics of late 2014, have now discovered that Trump is impure, and are spending their time, money and effort firing in that direction.
But, hey – a pretty face and perfect haircut is bound to work this time.
After a couple of years as AG, I’d like to see Pres. Rubio nominate him for the Supreme Court. What’s the chance of that confirmation hearing being the best evah! Thirty years down the road with Justice Cruz still being in the drivers seat? I say make it so. President is a misuse of Ted’s talents.
That’s how I see him too. What a great thing it would be. Having said that, if he’s the nominee I’ll vote for him of course.
Even so, the Texas electorate is nothing like the American electorate.
I think it’s not enough to make him Justice, he would also have to become official prophecy monger or something. There would be crowds… SCOTUS would finally attain rock god status!
I really dislike Cruz. Funny thing is, I think his interpretation on constitutional matters is superb and his direction on policy is at the top of the list.
But I really dislike him. I do not want to hear him for 4 years preaching, in the same way I do not want to hear Obama preach. Even when Obama says something that makes sense (e.g. his recent statements that college students need to learn to be less sensitive and engage in real debate), I just get angry at him for saying it. It’s the same thing with Cruz. I admit it…I am human.
And perhaps most importantly: If there are a bunch of us who agree with him and just dislike him…imagine what his relations with Congress will be like! And to those who say that Dems will just fight any Republican, I disagree. There are Dems who are capable of acting reasonably and approaching things in a business-like manner. For example, the dozens of Dems who supported more checks for Syrians.
It’s just that they go into reflexive hatred mode when the Republican is someone they “culturally” dislike, like Bush and Cruz. As a practical matter, we have a much better chance of getting conservative reform in place with a person who can decrease the hatred from Dems on Capitol Hill. I think Rubio could do that. I think Christie can do that. (And I disagree when people call him not conservative. I just don’t think the facts bear that out. So what if he worked with the President when Sandy hit – and even gave him a hug. I would too. He has been pushing that state to limit entitlements as much as possible in a thoroughly blue state.)
Yes, it pains me to bring into this what Dems think of someone. But in this case, I understand their reflexive dislike – because I share it. I just want the President and Congress to take steps in a significant conservative direction on entitlements, foreign policy and, oh, everything else. Especially fixing schools. And with someone in office that engenders hatred from Dems, it is not going to happen. Even if he got elected, he could not be successful without full control of Congress (including a filibuster proof Senate majority) because he is so irritating and dismissive of others. Sound familiar to anyone?
Obama nailed it when he said she was “likable enough.”
Haha talk about damning with faint praise.
What else could he do, for lack of a mirror to point at her-