Let me state up front that this article is not an endorsement for Ted Cruz, or any other candidate at this point in the primary proceedings. Questions concerning why and how to best Donald Trump are on many conservative’s minds, including most recently our very own Mitt Romney. The epithet “hijacking the Republican Party” is appearing more and more in the media, and the truth may not be that far off from the rhetoric. The case for Ted Cruz is simply the outcome of a logical analysis of what it might take to secure a conservative White House in 2016.
Further, the selection of a true conservative in the upcoming election may or may not solve the myriad of problems facing our nation. It can be argued that we are already past a point of no return, but at least a conservative President, allied with a functional conservative Congress, has a chance to delay or possibly reverse an impending economic and financial Fort Sumpter. Mr. Cruz is a well-known constitutional scholar and qualifies as a true conservative equally well or better than any of the remaining candidates.
Also, an argument for Ted Cruz does not presuppose a preference for Mr. Cruz or any particular dislike for Mr. Rubio or Mr. Kasich. If anything can be said about the Republican field this year, one can say there has been great depth in talent and leadership. I have enjoyed hearing from many potential candidates who are now no longer in the race. Real dialogue and real ideas were offered by these outstanding individuals in past debates. The simple truth is, splitting the vote among three additional remaining candidates does nothing to slow Mr. Trump’s advance. Those votes need to unite against Mr. Trump with pointed purpose. But who to best carry that torch?
The argument for Ted Cruz is fairly simple when viewed logically. Goal number one is to prevent a Democrat candidate from securing the White House. Assuming Hillary Clinton will be coronated (and not indicted), both Mr. Cruz and Mr. Rubio narrowly best Mrs. Clinton in a general election according to current polls. Mr. Trump loses, and by a fair margin. On this basis alone, never mind the “he’s not a real Republican” or the “press will eat him alive” diatribes, a Trump nomination should be disqualified. None of Mr. Trump’s bloviating and wishful thinking will likely change his high negative perception among a significant part of the general public or lift him above a Clinton-led ticket.
The second most important criteria is to capture the insurgent “anti-establishment” crusade that has propelled Mr. Trump to his front-running position. From this perspective, Mr. Cruz clearly has the edge. He is not well liked in Washington mainly because he is not a pushover for special interests and entitlements, or pork barrel day-to-day business. Any candidate that threatens the plundering of our treasury to such perpetually outstretched hands must prepare for strident opposition from both sides of the aisle. The problem with this position is, despite being perceived as an insurgent, that no President in quite some time has actually quelled the deficit outflow at all. Talk is one thing, actual hard-liner actions post-election will be another. Mr. Cruz is definitely perceived as being tougher from this point of view.
A third consideration is the possible result of a brokered or open convention that eschews Donald Trump. Such a strategy might well result in Mr. Trump declaring on a third party ticket. And that almost certainly means a Democrat victory as conservatives and undecided independents become split within their voting blocs (see goal number one above). With his ego and the current history of the primaries, I would bet the farm that if Mr. Trump does not legitimately lose the delegate count to Mr. Cruz, he will move forward as an independent. Even with a scenario resulting in fairly fought victory by Mr. Cruz, all bets are off on what Mr. Trump might do next.
An additional issue is the media firestorm that is slowly being rolled out. The difference between Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, at least in terms of ammunition for character assassinating attack (the usual liberal press modus operandi) is the equal to the difference between a firecracker and a small thermo-nuclear device. Just too much ordnance to fire against Mr. Trump. Mr. Cruz might have a small basket of dirty laundry somewhere, but Mr. Trump will have truckloads of it. Mr. Cruz, Mr. Rubio and even Mitt Romney have considerately laid out a nice blueprint of attack already.
And last but not least, is that elusive Hispanic vote. Both Mr. Cruz and Mr. Rubio would certainly garner significantly more than the paltry 27% Mitt Romney rated in the last election. If past historical election data is studied, even a small majority of Hispanic voters switching to the Republican ticket would turn the states of Arizona, Nevada, Florida, New Mexico, Colorado and California (a whopping 115 electoral votes). You read that right, a 55-60% Hispanic vote count in California would likely deliver the mother of all blue states to Mr. Cruz. Stunning, but well within the realm of possibility. The question is, would either of these candidates actually play the “first Hispanic President” hand well enough to pull off such a coup? Hard to say. The immigration issue is a real high wire act that has to be negotiated skillfully.
Both Mr. Cruz and Mr. Rubio are fairly close in each of these important criteria. The edge must go to Mr. Cruz, however, when taking the insurgent movement into consideration. Mr. Rubio is simply younger, less experienced and less polished, yet perceived as more of an “insider”, gang of eight and all of that. This may be all it takes to keep the important middle of the road moderates and independents in Mr. Trump’s corner or out of the game completely. These disgruntled, anti-establishment voters will be critical to defeating a Clinton ticket.
Glenn Beck may have called it right. Offer Rubio the Vice Presidency if he backs Ted Cruz and move forward with a Hispanic super-ticket. Unite the remaining delegates around Mr. Cruz and take your chances at legitimately ousting Trump. Any other path logically leads to an unthinkable conclusion, another Democrat in the White House. And if that happens, the economic and social problems we now face will be exacerbated, and America as we know it will eventually crumble. And that is an outcome that would defy all logic when election time comes.