Home
> I am Canadian!, Political philosophy, Political prognostication, USA! USA! USA! > Cruz Control
Cruz Control
August 1, 2012
Now that Ted Cruz has trounced his opponents in the Republican Senate Primary in Texas, join me in laughing at this anti-Canadian anti-Cruz site.
Ted’s probably going to be a rock star, and we may yet see him as a justice at SCOTUS or in the White House. (Clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist.)
If he does run for the presidency someday, expect to see a rather vicious debate on whether citizens “by birth abroad” are “natural-born”. There’s enough contemporaneous evidence to satisfy the originalists that they probably are.
George Romney was born in Mexico and John McCain was born in Panama, so I think that debate’s pretty much settled. On the other hand, it is interesting that the GOP wants to deny citizenship to “anchor babies,” while maintaining it for good Republicans like Romney, McCain and Cruz.
I don’t know enough about Cruz to comment (or care) much either way. But it is nice to see the Tea Party win a state where doing so doesn’t give the seat to a Democrat. If those assholes were smart, they would’ve thought of this two years ago.
But from what I understand, Cruz is a DeMint guy, which I see as limiting his options. If McConnell remains leader, which seems likely, he’ll be screwed on committee assignments, as he probably should be. If DeMint manages to pull of a coup, he’ll wreck the Senate and pretty much everyone aligned with him nationally.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see that because it might finally restore some sanity to the party.
I think that my all-around favourite part of last night was seeing just how thoroughly it humiliated Rick Perry. That boy is ruined, not just nationally, but in Texas.
“Our final pre-election poll on this race found that two times more Texas Republicans considered an endorsement from Rick Perry to be a negative than a positive. 35% said they were less likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by Perry, 15% said they were more likely to, and 50% said they didn’t care either way. Dewhurst’s choice to spotlight his support from Perry so heavily is curious against the backdrop of those numbers.”
“The result tonight provides real world evidence of something that we’ve been finding in our polling for a while now: that Perry’s standing has been significantly diminished in Texas after his failed White House bid and that he could be in serious trouble if he tries for another term in 2014.”
George Romney didn’t get the nomination, and McCain was born in the Canal Zone, which has slightly different status. (Though it might not have when he was born.)
But yes, I’m pretty confident citizens by birth abroad are still “natural-born”.
Cruz is an impressive guy — it takes chops to clerk for the Chief Justice. He’ll be a national star.
I’ve studied the ’68 election pretty closely, and I have yet to read anything about Romney’s citizenship being questioned, and he was the frontrunner for the better part of a year.
Also, I think you’re mistaking intellectual chops for political ones. Intellectuals rarely succeed in politics, for obvious reasons. And that’s especially true in the modern Republican Party, where being a simpleton is something that elevates you.
Granted, I was pleasantly surprised by Rand Paul, but he’s been marginalized for the very qualities that make him impressive.
As for Cruz’s future – and, as I said, I don’t know a lot about him, he seems to be in a unique position where the establishments of both Austin and Washington are out to get him. And since this was only his first election, it’s hard to see how he has the political skills to survive that.
Sarah Palin is also a “national star,” but she has almost no practical influence on anything outside of reality television. In a hyperpolarized era with an incredibly ignorant electorate, stars might raise money, but they don’t tend to shift votes.
The last sitting senator to be appointed to the Supreme Court was James Byrnes .. 71 years ago. In an era where you need 60 votes to pass anything in the Senate (thanks again to the GOP,) I don’t see a president risking a Senate seat for a Court nomination. That boat has well and truly sailed forever.
Finally, I think it’s going to be a good long time before we see another president from Texas.
Democrats declared war over judicial nominations first, not Republicans.
And they were the ones who started filbustering Republican nominees. Republicans had to respond in kind.
What I meant was that no president will put a Senate seat in play to make a Court appointment when it takes a filibuster-proof majority just to do ordinary business.
You’re right on judicial filibusters. But the GOP responded by filibustering everything on closure motions, which is a new phenomenon and one I’m sure that they’ll bitch endlessly about if the win control this year and it’s used against them.
That this will happen is the most predictable thing in the world and goes a long way in explaining why Republicans are such cunts.
If there’s a Republican governor in Texas to appoint the replacement, sure they can do it without any great problems. It’s no great loss if Cruz looks like he’d be a good Supreme Court justice and he is willing to take the job.
Re filibusters, there’s no point in being the one side that doesn’t do it. That aids the “only Republicans nominate people so extreme that they have to be filibustered” narrative that the media liked to run with.
Again, you’re ignoring the point. The GOP is filibustering cloture on everything, not just judicial nominees.
So?
Ah, you’re quoting Dick Cheney on me, aren’t you?
And you know what? That’s cool, so long as you don’t whine when the Democrats do it on everything a Republican president wants to pass.
They’re going to do it anyway. Whining is only a ref-working strategy, nothing more.
The proper response is either: 1. Be the first to nuke the filibuster, on the basis that it’s going to happen anyway; or 2. Go to home states of filibustering senators where public opinion is in favour of the bill and threaten to end their careers if they don’t give way.
It’s totally doable — Reagan did it with a Democrat House for his tax cuts. But you have to have public opinion in your favour. Why Obama’s had such a tough time doing it is this: public opinion was not in favour of his bills.