Bill Kraus' Walker-Won't-Run Posting Is A Head-Scratcher
Bill Kraus might be on to something predicting that Scott Walker won't run for re-election, as Walker definitely has The Presidential Bug, but suggesting that Attorney General J. B Van Hollen is the heir apparent?
No way. The GOP base sees him as moderate and squishy. The base would prefer Rebecca Kleefisch, among others.
13 comments:
As a conservative who is not allowed to post under a screen name, I would work against JBV in every way possible to make sure he is not the nominee for the Republican party
That being said, as much as I like Scott Walker and his leadership in Wisconsin, playing on a national stage is a huge step. He would certainly need to step up his game in foreign policy and quite honestly, while very likeable, Walker is kind of dull in the public speaking arena. He certainly doesn't have the charisma of say... Ronald Reagan.
In fact, I don't see him having the same gravitas as even a Paul Ryan.
While Presidential aspirations may be in Walker's head, he really needs some more political seasoning before stepping out on the national stage.
This from a life-long conservative who voted for him twice and would happily do it a third time as well.
Doesn't matter what the base thinks right now -- once the mighty wurlitzer cranks up the propaganda machine and the right-wing media echo chamber starts screeching van hollen's praise across the state, it will not matter what people thought right now.
Anon -- you overlook the biggest area where walker needs to "step up his game".
The man has the integrity of a weasel and can be demonstrated to be a habitual liar (perhaps pathologically so).
Of course, that may be an "advantage" from your point of view as it allows him to escape accountability or responsibility for anything -- critical if you intentions are to "divide and conquer" and "drop the bomb".
Criminal probes (and dan bice's recent report inaccurately implies the old john doe probe found noth wrong (absolutely and demonstratively NOT TRUE).
The FBI has had important evidence from Cynthia Archer for some time now...
I imagine even you would agree that walker won't look good on TEE-VEE in an orange jump-suit.
Not that journal communications, lee enterprises, gannet, or clear channel (among others) would care -- they will endorse walker regardless.
Anon -- Paul Ryan?
The man that barges into soup kitchens after the stinky people have eaten, grabs clean pots and pans off the wall, and stages bogus photo-ops that he somehow played a critical role in the dinner that night.
Dude -- even sociopathic and serial liar mitt romney had to order ryan to the sidelines in the final stages of the election. He was that toxic.
And he couldn't even carry his hometown (and only won re-election because of extreme gerrymandering).
John Doe 2.0 changes everything. The investigation and possible indictments will run well into 2014 and probably 2015. This isn't the stuff that successful Presidential campaigns are made of. From a national perspective, a Walker decision not to run for re-election will appear as though it is driven by scandal. Mr. Unintimidated may have no choice but run again, while motivating the base by playing the persecution card. From a tactical and legal standpoint he also has a better chance of scuttling the criminal probe by retaining his office and calling in his pay-to-play chips. Once he is a lame-duck many hidden knives may appear and loose tongues will wag.
Walker's recent political career has been defined by the strategy of slashing, burning and running for higher office before the disaster becomes apparent. If he waits until 2020 this state will be such a mismanaged mess that even winning the Wisconsin primary will prove difficult.
This is quite a dilemma. It's enough to make a balding man weep.
t would be nice if the media, or at least the blogsphere placed a lot more attention on Van Hollen's protection of Vukimir and the ALEC records.
That seems to have vanished off the face of the planet. WTH guys.
As a conservative who is not allowed to post under a screen name,
Pick a pseudonym. Who's mom is stopping you?
@Zombie
Petition James to unleash me and I'll post under my screen name.
Until then, he won't let my posts go through due to some comment I made 3 months ago about co-sleeping deaths in Milwaukee.
If you still can't figure it out, your clue is the at the end of the 1st paragraph in the anonymous post at 8:09.
Your favorite 80s presidential follower.
@October 24, 2013 at 7:53 AM
" Anonymous said...
As a conservative who is not allowed to post under a screen name . . . "
Rayguns! You're back. Can't say we missed you, can't say we didn't.
Note to James Rowen: Be aware that Rayguns and other nasties such as Jim the Republican you kicked off your blog may be trying to sneak back in anonymously.
I am aware that he offers comments under Anonymous. His punishment is that he does not get the full effect of his comment. As to the reason: he know that he offered something extremely sexist. I am sure he has it recorded somewhere and is free to send it. I won't waste the time looking for it.
But a true disciple of Ronald Reagan would not have written what was sent.
Rayguns! You're back. Can't say we missed you, can't say we didn't.
I can say that for my part, I certainly didn't miss him. Had forgotten about him, to be truthful.
Petition James to unleash me and I'll post under my screen name.
I'll do no such thing. Justice was meet and appropriate.
Coexist, right ZRM.
Post a Comment