PLANK JULY 31, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
The holy crusade that movement conservatives undertook against Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst concluded with Tuesday’s Senate runoff, producing his once-unlikely defeat at the hands of his much-celebrated Tea Party challenger, former state solicitor general Ted Cruz.* What makes the election so interesting is that Dewhurst, who has been denounced from one end of the conservative blogosphere to the other as a “RINO” and as “Dewcrist,” can’t really be accused of any specific ideological heresies. Unlike Indiana’s Dick Lugar, he hasn’t supported any arms control treaties or gun control measures or “earmarks.” Unlike many of 2010’s Tea Party targets, he can’t be accused of social-issues moderation; he was staunchly supported by Texas’ main anti-abortion groups. And unlike Orrin Hatch of Utah, he hasn’t thumbed his nose at ultra-conservatives; he calls himself a “constitutional conservative,” says he supported Tea Party policies before there was a Tea Party, and heavily identifies himself with his most important backer, Gov. Rick Perry, who can snarl and rant at godless liberals with the best of them.
This did not keep Cruz’s backers from calling Dewhurst names, of course. But when challenged, they always seemed to find some objection to Dewhurst that did not involve any actual issues. RedState’s Erick Erickson scoffed at the very idea that Dewhurst was a real conservative, but relied mainly on the two candidates’ lists of supporters to establish some distinction between them. National Review’s editors focused on Dewhurst’s negative ads against Cruz, another non-ideological factor.
In explaining this odd “purge,” Slate’s David Weigel believes it’s all pretty simple: Texas is a safe state for an intra-party bloodbath (the Democratic Senate nominee is virtually unknown and penniless) and Cruz is young and Hispanic at a time when conservatives are battening down the hatches for a long-term struggle against demographic tides that doom any party relying on today’s old-white-people GOP “base.” They’re naturally very interested in building a bench of younger minority pols who show not an ounce of ideological moderation. Cruz quite possibly represents a Hispanic insurance policy in case his better-established fellow Cuban-American conservative, Marco Rubio, falters (as he well might thanks to his questionable associations in South Florida and his own shaky personal financial history.) Just as importantly, the uprising against Dewhurst became something of an end in itself: a test of the power of movement-conservative elements of the GOP that failed to unite behind a presidential candidate, and are determined to surround Mitt Romney—if he is elected president—with as many ideological commissars as possible.
But regardless of the inner motives of the vast array of right-wing groups and celebrities backing Cruz (and he’s got just about all of them, from Palin and DeMint to the Club for Growth to Eagle Forum to the major Tea Party organizations), a Cruz victory will have an independent impact on perceptions of the future direction of the GOP and the conservative movement. And since the closest thing to “moderation” Dewhurst can be accused of is the occasional willingness to negotiate with Democrats in the Texas legislature, a Cruz win, particularly if it’s big, will be widely interpreted as a warning to congressional Republicans against anything other than hard-core, no-compromise, let-the-economy-go-to-hell positioning on all the upcoming fiscal battles—and, in the event Barack Obama is re-elected, a continuation or even intensification of the war to end all partisan wars in Washington.
It’s true that Cruz (like Rubio, a Florida House speaker and protégé of Jeb Bush before he was adopted by the Tea Party and deposed Charlie Crist) has his own “Washington Establishment” background, as a Justice Department attorney during the Bush administration. But it’s hard to imagine him defying the powerful ideologues that validated him as a viable challenger (with some inadvertent assistance from the Texas legislature’s decision—driven by uncertainty over judicial review of its redistricting plan—to create an unusually long runoff campaign between the May primary and the July runoff) and kept him financially competitive with Dewhurst’s deep pockets. The Club for Growth alone poured more than five million dollars into Cruz’s campaign. He is very unlikely to bite the hands that fed him, and those hands have been significantly strengthened by his victory.
*Editor's Note: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Ted Cruz was state treasurer. We regret the error.
photograph by Gage Skidmore, used under creative commons
15 comments
Please note that Ted Cruz is a former solicitor general and not state treasurer. Kay Bailey Hutchison, the current Senator, (and former Gov. Ann Richards) are former state treasurers, but the office was abolished in the mid-1990s.
- phparker
July 31, 2012 at 11:53pm
This is a very helpful, explanatory post. Thanks for putting it up, Mr. Kilgore. I'm coming to believe that 2014 really is the election that could change the country (for the worse) for decades given the beyond ugly Senate map that year, mid-terms for a likely re-elected President Obama and an energized and enraged Tea Party-led right wing. I think this upset is the beginning of that cycle. I hope I'm wrong.
- SteveJudd
July 31, 2012 at 11:59pm
SteveJudd The GOP is systematically purging those in its midst whom aren't extremists. This will not only change the country for the worst. It will endanger it. At least half the people in the America are voting for fanatics (although many of those voters are too stupid to realize this). I fear for the Republic. Fanaticism plus stupidity could mean the end of our democratic experiment.
- magboy47.
August 1, 2012 at 12:53am
Listening to the debates between Cruz and Dewhurst was amazing. Neither differed one iota on any significant issues, and yet Cruz excelled at breathing fire at Dewhurst. I'd love to call this some sort of Saturnalia inviting the Texas Democrats to a statewide win (something we haven't seen in decades now), perhaps by capturing some of the disaffected moderates and conservatives out there, but as Kilgore points out, the state party is totally unfunded and unable to cobble together even the smallest semblance of a campaign.
- zuludown
August 1, 2012 at 12:56am
er, "saturnine event" rather than Saturnalia. Though the slave-master reversal on Saturnalia might be an appropriate metaphor, too. I was going for "eating one's own alive" though.
- zuludown
August 1, 2012 at 12:58am
My fear is that the tea party Republicans will be unified behind a fantasy such as lower capital gains rates or lower top rates helping the economy and Democrats will continue to be divided.
- Nusholtz
August 1, 2012 at 8:03am
On a separate note, why do Republicans insist on seeing Cuban-Americans as avatars of the Hispanic vote nationwide? Other than language, they share so little with their fellow Hispanics in terms of political issues and concerns, given that their politics are shaped so much by their Communist-run mother country. And it seems that it's not just for the sake of appearances, so that moderate white voters won't associated the GOP with anti-Hispanic nativism, the way that Republicans trot out token African-Americans from time to time to insulate themselves from accusations of pandering to racist Southern whites. Top GOP operatives actually believe that prominent Cuban-Americans help the GOP with Hispanics of all backgrounds in various areas of the country. It is really baffling -- as if the GOP elevated Vietnamese-Americans in an effort to get other Asian-Americans to vote for them.
- wildboy
August 1, 2012 at 10:12am
While Cuban Americans are not a prototype for Hispanic Americans, all Hispanics share similar qualities: they are either Catholic or Protestant, they respect their belief in Christianity, they believe in the family structure, they are hard working, they are patriotic, and they are proud to be Americans. Thus, they are natural Republicans. As for the token Republican African Americans, what does that mean? The Tea Party would support Representative Allen West for President of the United States: he is an African-American. Lynn Swann was the Republican candidate for governor of Pennsylvania. There are few Republican African-American office holders, because African-Americans vote the Democratic ticket more than 90% of the time. Consequently, conservative Republican African Americans will lose when they run for office, unless they run in white districts. Race is not the issue for conservatives: culture and ideology are the issues. I think, for America to grow and prosper,we must get beyond race and accept that all people are similar and different. We must respect each other and we must live and let live. Most people discriminate based upon culture and ideology, not race. Race baiting is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
- john336
August 1, 2012 at 11:38am
Magboy, not all the people who are not fanatics but vote for Republicans are stupid. A good chunk of them are intelligent, aware, and often culturally moderate business people (i.e., they're OK with abortion, gays, etc.) who have always voted for Republicans in order to have lower taxes and less regulation. I work with a lot of people like this. They are not unaware of the fanatacism, but so far have placed the less-taxation-and-regulation goal above all else. It will be interesting to see the extent to which they will continue to do this as the Republican party becomes more and more extreme. One hopes that at some point they will decide that they can't vote for these nutcases no matter how little government interference with business they promise...but one is not optimistic.
- VAliberal
August 1, 2012 at 1:13pm
john336, If Hispanics are natural Republicans, why do they vote overwhelmingly for Democrats? And since when is belief in Christianity, the family structure, hard work, and patriotism the exclusive bailiwick of Republicans? I'm all of the above (except for the the organized-Christianity part--I believe in a Creator, but not a punishing one). I even served in the military. And I vote mostly Democratic (I voted for Mitt Romney's father for Michigan governor in the Sixties). And I thought (false) patriotism was the last refuge of a scoundrel. And BTW, race IS an issue for many whites from the South and some in the North who vote Republican. Obama is not passionately hated by many southerners simply because he's a Democrat. I know a white senior who normally votes Democratic, but he refuses to vote for Obama because he's not white. Yes, Democrats can be racists, too. In fact, almost all southern Democrats used to be such. However, I do agree with you that the accusation of racism is used so often that it sometimes loses its impact. I don't like political correctness any more than Republicans do. Jus' sayin', as they say.
- magboy47.
August 1, 2012 at 1:31pm
mslyman, I know the Republican-voting people you're talking about. Many of them have been friends. But less taxation and regulation has become a fanatic issue with these voters. Less taxation and regulation has led to economic disaster in America. But many GOP voters can't give those issues up. We had severe tax and regulation reduction under G.W. Bush and we were bleeding jobs badly by 2006. That's one of the reasons the Democrats took back Congress in 2006. And then we had the 2008 crash, partly caused by deregulation (but mostly by pure greed on almost everyone's part). Tax cuts do not create jobs in the general economy. All they've done is make most business people more money. And they've increased the national debt dramatically. Small-business people want less taxes and regulations for themselves, so they can make more money or to simply survive in business. But they often don't look at the big picture. A bleeding or crashed economy is not going to help their business. It's only going to help the rich. And since 2008 rich corporations and individuals have been making all-time record profits. Go figure.
- magboy47.
August 1, 2012 at 1:50pm
I can't tell if john336 is being facetious in his response or not, mentioning how all Hispanics would make good Republicans because they are Christian and need oxygen to live, or talking up Lynn Swann's pathetic campaign for Governor of Pennsylvania or Republican love for Allen West (why not mention Alan Keyes? He ran for President three times, for crying out loud!) Since I assume the best of people, I will salute him on his terrific sense of humor.
- wildboy
August 1, 2012 at 4:12pm
There is no political or religious "formula" that guarantees success and happiness in this life. The "accidental" genius of America is that we came up with a system where people of different opinions and values fight to the death while relatively rarely actually fighting to the death. (We got most of that out of our system with the "Civil" War.) I cautiously like Obama (while not entirely trusting him); I cautiously despise Romney, while not fearing him or his possible election that much. Though one never knows. Two term limitation is a good idea that's worked relatively well so far.
- skahn
August 1, 2012 at 5:53pm
Wildboy: I think it is unfair to compare Allen West to Alan Keyes. Allen West is a war hero, a Lt. Colonel. He has courage and discipline. He is intelligent. He is a great American. There is no reason to denigrate such a fine man.
- john336
August 1, 2012 at 7:55pm
Magboy--All depressingly true, and that's why I have little optimism that even the worst nutcase will jolt these people out of voting Republican. And small business is yet another example of how good Republicans are at convincing people to vote against their own self-interest.
- VAliberal
August 1, 2012 at 9:43pm