Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

Ted Cruz Hints at What His Presidential Campaign Might Look Like

Metrics, evangelicals, and Reagan Democrats are key.

by
Paula Bolyard

Bio

August 30, 2014 - 8:19 pm
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

In a wide-ranging press conference immediately following his enthusiastically received speech at Americans for Prosperity’s “Defending the American Dream” conference in Dallas on Saturday, Texas Senator Ted Cruz hinted at what his path to victory might look like should he decide to run for president. Cruz, who has thus far evaded questions about his intentions to seek the Republican nomination, has recently made non-committal statements like “time will tell,” but on Saturday he offered his vision of a Republican path to victory.

Cruz was asked by a reporter at the press conference whether he had any plans to travel to Scranton, since “every successful candidate who’s run for president since FDR has gone through Scranton, Pennsylvania.”

Cruz said that he has never been to Scranton, but took the opportunity to explain how he won his Senate race in Texas and what he thinks Republicans need to do to win the presidency in 2016.

Cruz said that he is a big believer in examining data and metrics. “For those of y’all from Texas, you’ll remember the Senate race we had here.” He said, “It was a $50 million primary where we were outspent 3-1. We had $35 million in attack ads run against us. When you’re being outspent 3-1 you have to run a very data-driven, metric-driven campaign because every dollar you spend, you’ve got to get 3x bang for the buck. You can’t afford to waste a penny.” Sean Theriault, a University of Texas at Austin political scientist, called Cruz “the Barack Obama of 2012,” for his extraordinary success using data and social media in his underdog win over David Dewhurst in the Republican primary. “It is a great case study of using these tools in politics,” Theriault said.

Cruz conceded that the demographic difference between Republicans and Democrats is significant and said Republicans need to do much better in the minority community. “I was proud here in Texas to do much, much better in the Hispanic community than Mitt Romney did.” But he said the biggest difference is not the demographic shift. “The biggest difference is the millions of conservatives who showed up and voted in 2004 that stayed home in 2008 and 2012. And they fall largely into two categories,” said Cruz. “Number one, evangelical Christians — millions of believers who showed up in ‘04 who didn’t show up in ‘08 and ‘12. And number two, going back to your question [about Scranton], the so-called Reagan Democrats.”

Cruz said the Reagan Democrats up and down the Rust Belt (many of them ethnic Catholics) “tend to be blue collar, union members, gun owners, strong national defense.” According to Cruz, Pennsylvania is right in the heart of Reagan Democrat territory and they showed up to vote in 2004 but stayed home in the next two elections. “If you look in the last 50 years, there is only one Republican who has a group of Democrats named after him: Reagan Democrats. If the Washington consultants were right — that the way you bring people out is moving to the mushy middle, standing for nothing, blurring your distinction with the Democrats — then you’d see all sorts of Democrats named after some of the losing Republican nominees,” Cruz said in an obvious reference to Mitt Romney and John McCain.

In outlining a Republican strategy for victory in the 2016 presidential race, Cruz draws a sharp contrast to Rand Paul, who is courting minorities and young people as he travels the country, testing the waters for a presidential run. Potential contenders Jeb Bush and Paul Ryan have also focused on growing the party by attracting minorities. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie could potentially attract Reagan Democrats but has a frigid relationship with the most conservative wing of the party. Texas Governor Rick Perry would likely appeal to a voting bloc similar to Cruz’s. Perry has strong connections to the evangelical community and his success as a job creator in Texas could potentially resonate with the Reagan Democrats Cruz says Republicans need to recapture.

Cruz went on to explain Reagan’s appeal to Democrats. “President Reagan drew a line in the sand. He didn’t say, ‘I’m just like Jimmy Carter,’ he said, ‘This race is about a fundamental choice and president Carter and I have fundamentally different visions for this country.’”

Watch the video on the next page.

Top Rated Comments   
Ergo, the only people qualified are the fired, retired or unemployed.

Unfortunately, the Republicans can't use the slacker platform. The Democrats own the copyright.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Before my fellow libertarians start in, remember, he's already got us with his core message. He's talking outreach.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
I like Sen. Cruz very much, but my next choice for president will be a governor. I think he would make an excellent running mate or be a fine choice for Attorney General or a great addition to the Supreme Court, however.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (55)
All Comments   (55)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Cruz ain't runnin...

It's just a matter of time before someone asks him, "How come Barry is the first sElected pResident since the ratification of the US Constitution born to only one citizen parent?"

Can anyone here answer that question? Bueller?

Ben Carson is a viable candidate. Cruz is not because he is not a natural born citzen as per Art. Sec. 1 of the US Constitution and true Conservative will not let him forget that if he attempt to run.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Cruz is not because he is not a natural born citzen as per Art. Sec. 1 of the US Constitution and true Conservative will not let him forget that if he attempt to run."

You need to stop peddling that nonsense. In the second place, Oh Ignorant One, the Presidency is defined in Article 2, not "Art. Sec 1" (whatever THAT is!) of the U.S. Constitution. Say, have you even READ it?

Here's Article 2: "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

Notice that "natural born citizen" is not defined. Since it is not defined in the Constitution (in Article TWO, by the way, Oh Ignorant One), it is up to the Congress to define it.

It has. Cruz is eligible.

No true conservative will let you forget that.

7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Carson could be a great VP for Cruz. Just the demographics could add 2 to 5 million votes to the usual turnout.

That way, Cruz could have a few years to school Dr. Carson, and if it works out, the doctor could follow. At this point, Carson is too big of a risk for several reasons: too new to know for sure what he stands for, some evidence that he is less than a rock-solid conservative, might not have the stomach for dealing with scumbags on a regular basis.

But having said that, if the Doctor somehow gets the nomination, he appears to be no worse than Romney or any other feeding-at-the-trough Republican...probably an improvement on them actually.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Hmmm. That could be interesting.

Certainly Carson would be a BIG improvement over any of the RINO class. He's not one of them, but he's not solid either. Not yet, anyway. I have hopes for him.

I think Carson as the Presidential candidate is problematic for another reason - it will look way too much like pandering. Not good.

Best to let him season a while and see how he grows.

7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Ben Carson is a viable candidate."

No, he's not ready in a number of ways. He's come late to thinking about things political, and while he's got a decent foundation of principles under him, they are not well thought out, and as a result, he's squishy on a number of very important areas.

For example, he's NOT good on the 2nd Amendment. Not good AT ALL.

He's also not clear on the proper limitations of government, particularly the federal government.

I have hopes that he will mature into a sold, Constitutional conservative in a few years.

But he's not there yet, not by a looong way.


"Cruz is not because he is not a natural born citzen as per Art. Sec. 1 of the US Constitution and true Conservative will not let him forget that if he attempt to run."


Wrong. In the first place, Article 1 does not define the term. Many conservatives lately have tried to pretended to find a definition among the writings of the Founders, but it's not there. Our Constitution is not perfect, and this is one of the gaps. I don't like that, but it's reality.

Since the text of the Constitution is ambiguous, we are left to Congress and case law to define the term. That's where we are, like it or not. Under current law, Ted Cruz is a natural born American citizen, and he is fully eligible to be President, just as much as John McCain (who was also not born on American soil).

Now, I personally would like to see an Amendment that would clarify exactly what that phrase means, along with clarifying what a citizen is (no more anchor babies!), but the law is what the law is, whether we like it or not.

And you might want to consider the fact that there is NOBODY among the possible candidates who understands and values that Constitution more than Ted Cruz. NOBODY.


He's legally eligible, and he's an excellent choice. He would give the libs fits.

7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Has anyone ever seen Cruz use a teleprompter? I have not and to me that is a sign of someone who does not have to memorize what he believes but has it imbedded in his heart. Unlike the jokester in chief and Romney, McCain and others he really believes what he says. He is one of the few we can have a small amount of faith in, but always watch them. Our political leaders are a slippery bunch.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
A very good point. He is also an excellent (trained) debater.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
" that is a sign of someone who does not have to memorize what he believes but has it imbedded in his heart."

Exactly right.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Libwits hate Cruz with a blind fury.

Republicans hate Criz with a blind fury.

That makes him the obvious choice. The fact that he is brilliant, a constitutional conservative, a Hispanic, fearless, and a terrific politician is simply icing on the cake.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Republicans hate Criz with a blind fury." "That makes him the obvious choice."

Based on what nature of logic? How can you expect him to effectively lead the party & unify it? It cannot happen until he can command their respect, let alone their admiration.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Based on the fact that Republicans couldn't beat the most incompetent (and BY FAR, the most radically extreme, even anti-American) person in American history - twice; and now seek to nominate another loser.

If you can't see that, you are just as hopeless as they are.

And also see Mark v's excellent response below.

If by some chance the establishment republicans win in 2016, it will simply prolong the country's death throes. They won't change anything; nothing will be reversed; it will simply add 4 or 8 years to the agony.

The only tiny chance to turn it around is to elect somebody who actually intends to do so. There are probably two people who can and want to. One of them is Rand Paul, who is to the left of Obama on foreign policy. The other is Ted Cruz.

It isn't obvious that Cruz can win, because he will be savaged by the entrenched ruling class beyond anything that they have done before...but it is obvious that he is the only person on the horizon that can turn the country around if he can run the gauntlet.

If I'm going to die anyway, personally, I'd rather die with guns blazing.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
"If I'm going to die anyway, personally, I'd rather die with guns blazing."

Exactly. In combat, there are different situations. One of the most unpleasant is when we are forced to retreat. There are good ways to retreat, and there are bad ways. One thing that is essential is to make the enemy pay for every inch you give up. You make him pay in blood (metaphorically, here), money, and TIME.

If we get a RINO candidate, this is the best we can do - let the enemy advance less rapidly. Romney, for example, would have been less bad than Obama. The Marxist agenda would have been slowed. That's why I held my nose and voted for the cretin.

In other combat scenarios, your back is against the wall and you have nothing to lose by radical action. You go for the brass ring no matter what.

Ted Cruz is the brass ring. He is the ONLY candidate on the horizon who is a committed, principled Constitutionalist. PERIOD.

He is also, as mentioned above, an excellent leader (he got the House to do his bidding and he's not even a Congressman? And you think he's NOT a leader?!?!?!?), a skilled debater, and a charismatic speechifier (with apologies to Davy Crockett).

Oh, in addition to all of that, which is ENOUGH, let's get real-world cynical for a moment.


He'll stomp the Dems with the Hispanic vote, and he won't pander on immigration to do it.


The one thing he's "missing" is the much-overrated "executive experience".

I just don't know what to say to people who think Obama's mess proves that a President needs executive experience. Such drooling stupidity is beyond reason.


7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Ted Cruz is the brass ring. He is the ONLY candidate on the horizon who is a committed, principled Constitutionalist."

No, he's not. He knows damned well that Article 2, Section 2 excludes him because he was a Canadian citizen at birth, as well as a Cuban citizen via his father, and an American citizen via his mother. The NBC clause was intended to exclude anyone who could even remotely have divided allegiance, or be subject to the jurisdiction of any other nation. Cruz is a liar when he claims he "didn't know" - he's got a JD, as well as a degree in International Affairs. And he never questioned what effect his birth in Canada had, or the fact that his father remained a citizen of Cuba until 2005? BS! If he were a "principled Constitutionalist" he would bow out gracefully, for exactly those reasons.

I wonder how comfortable you Cruz apologists will be when some anchor baby whose allegiance is to La Raza and Mexico (including the Sinaloa Cartel brats), or one of the Chinese or Russian birthright-benefit babies, decides to run for President.

NBC= born on U.S. soil to U.S. citizen parents - plural!!
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
"NBC= born on U.S. soil to U.S. citizen parents - plural!!"

Please show me that in the Constitution.


Oh, wait. You can't. It's not there.

5 weeks ago
5 weeks ago Link To Comment
Says you
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Which part? The facts of Cruz's tri-national citizenship, his father's naturalization only nine years ago, the potential for children of citizens of enemy nations to run for President, or the definition of NBC? All are public record; the last one can be found in the debates which led to the (convenient) legitimization of McCain's candidacy in 2008, put forth by Daniel Patrick Leahy, which is also consistent with case law.

Incidentally, if it weren't for this issue, I would have liked Cruz, but he's no better than Obama in this regard. Worse, even. Obama's history, his parentage, his current citizenship, even his right to the name 'Obama' are subject to debate (Sr. was a bigamist and the marriage was therefore illegal); Cruz has no such mystery behind which to hide.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
I'm pretty sure he meant "Establishment Republicans". And who is there that would be good for this country that the RINOs would NOT hate? A candidate that makes THEM happy and is a genuine conservative does not - CAN not - exist.

As for how he can unify and lead the party, there are two components to that:

1. Him.
2. Us.

If we overwhelmingly support him, the RINOs will be forced to reckon with him, will be forced to work with him.

If we give him that little bit of leverage, we will see from him the kind of leadership that will do exactly that.

If we don't support him, they will ignore him.

We have to do our part. Political power flows from two places - votes, or the barrel of a gun.

We have to give him the votes, or we will be looking down the barrel of a gun.

7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
You have just reminded us of how Reagan became the nominee. The RINOs of that era also detested him.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yes they did! He was their biggest mistake - they underestimated him.

Let's hope they do it again.

Oh, and for all that, he managed to barely squeak out a win or two, didn't he. And his coattails weren't too shabby, either.


His biggest mistake was taking GH Bush on board. The enemy within....


7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
> “If you look in the last 50 years, there is only one Republican who has a group of Democrats named after him: Reagan Democrats. If the Washington consultants were right — that the way you bring people out is moving to the mushy middle, standing for nothing, blurring your distinction with the Democrats — then you’d see all sorts of Democrats named after some of the losing Republican nominees..."

This needs to be etched bold in granite and exhibited somewhere, preferably outside the GOP headquarters.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
The "Texas-style" burgers in Scranton, PA are puny small meatloaf sandwiches. The burgers at East Texas Burger Co. in East Texas, Texas are about 8 inches across and have about half a cow, a bushel of tomatoes, a head or two of lettuce, a jar of sliced dill pickles, a few onions, mustard, mayo, no ketchup at all, with about five pounds of french fries for a side—all for about five dollars. Scranton is overrated.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
There might be some slight hyperbole and exaggeration in the description of the Texas burger from Texas. The Scranton "Texas" burger is still a hideous small meatloaf sandwich, but then again, they think bean soup is chili in Scranton.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
IMO, the only way the Republican Party can win any future presidential election is with someone who can unite the party's factions AWA draw enough Indy, women & minority voters to overcome the odds that are always stacked against the party due to MSM support for the Dems & their stellar record of carrying out very carefully-crafted, isolated incidents of voter fraud.

Is Ted Cruz such a man? I don't think so. I hope he stays on as Senator, where he can do more good. (But yes, I'd still vote for him if he were to emerge as the Pub candidate).
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Is Ted Cruz such a man? I don't think so."

Ted Cruz is exactly that man. If you are looking for someone to make EVERYBODY happy, stay home. No such person exists.

7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
A leader with a vision he can articulate and a vision that sounds like it is within the realm of possibility has the ability to draw in a lot of fence sitters. But is Cruz that man?
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Cruz has my vote already. All the rest is minutia. Cruz is smart, know how to take on the left and he doesn't pander. A constitutionally moored politician doesn't need to pander.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Ted Cruz is THE MAN for 2016. He is way smarter than ANY candidate from both Parties in the hunt. Obama could have been his caddy. Maybe. BTW, he is telling us the fact that so many millions stayed home because the Republicans haven't had a Conservative since Reagan, that it should be easy to come to him for a victorious candidate.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Before my fellow libertarians start in, remember, he's already got us with his core message. He's talking outreach.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
His core message is the Constitution. What's not to like?
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
I actually consider Cruz the thin end of the wedge, and the answer to the "isolationism" problem. 8 years of Cruz followed by 8 years of Rand Paul. Get the wars done and the people used to freedom again and follow with a hard core dose of firing government employees.

Yes, there is basically nothing not to like. To my shame I barely found out about this guy in time to rate a voter suppression call from David Dewhurst...
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Wait a darn minute. Ted Cruz Texas Senator.
"Hinting" at what his campaign for President might be like"?

Isn't being a Senator, or Congressman, or member of the Cabinet, or Judge or any other "Public Servant" a full time job?

HOW then is he or any other like him already on the publc payroll, able to find the time to "campaign for President"? Or any other elected public office?

But perhaps the answer is in the example of the present incumbent Executve of the USA, BH Obama.

Who treats the "job" as Executive of Enterprise USA as a 340 day search for the most attractive holiday venue. Favoring those with the best golf courses. To which spirited on Air Force One with his royal entourage.

ALL On the "High End" of the "Public Payroll". Now THAT's a "Dream From the Fathers".

And if he, or any others like him, is able to campaign for another job on the "public payroll" how well is he, or they, doing the job they are paid to do: "serving the People"? How well CAN they do that job to "serve the public" as PART-TIME employees?

Perhaps being able to campaign for President while Senator / Congressman / Judge, and or even Executive we their employers who provide their pay and perks might reasonably ask whether we really need them, ANY Of them, as "public servants".
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
"HOW then is he or any other like him already on the publc payroll, able to find the time to "campaign for President"? Or any other elected public office?"

Are you serious? I don't even want to try to imagine how much time they spend on just stuffing their campaign warchests. This is a priority that hardly takes a backseat to anything. This is what drives much of what they do (engaging in quid pro quo type exchanges with one another, regardless of party). It really is no small wonder why their poll numbers (as "Congress") are constantly in the twalet.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Ergo, the only people qualified are the fired, retired or unemployed.

Unfortunately, the Republicans can't use the slacker platform. The Democrats own the copyright.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Are you saying the only people who "can do politics" are professional politicians in good standing in the exclusive freemasonry of the political clubs? Or are the only people who would WANT "to do politics"?

Aren't there still people in America who have "cultivated their own EXTRA political garden" to not only beautify the environment but provide benefit to people?

Proved their belief in HOPE and CHANGE by following their OWN Dreams often with 24/7/365 hard hard and often thankless work in develoing small businesses to large enterprises entirely independent as far as possible on government? With NO control over people not intimately associated with their businesses? ( implicit is that the businesses are "lawful")

Providing real and even tangible service, CHOSEN by the recipients. NOT compelled by strangers in exclusive gated communities in a distant venue?
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Did you just not read the bit about being reluctant to talk about a campaign, and saying what any Republican would need to do to win. I guess if you don't like someone you can just read negativity into anything. I know! Let's just not have a Republican candidate because they're all too busy!
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Apparently, anyone currently holding office and being "on the public payroll" must not be allowed to run for public office - even for re-election by the looks of things.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
Not a totally terrible idea considering what the alternative has wrought. Frankly, I cannot see any reason we even need a president any more.
7 weeks ago
7 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All