1 vote

Political Idiot or Savant? What's Ted Cruz up to?

From The Atlantic Magazine

Critics think the Tea Party senator is being self-defeating, but his antics make sense if he's actually trying to remake the Republican Party in his image.

What's Ted Cruz up to? Is he a political idiot or a political savant?

Many people have argued that his antics, however well designed to appeal to the Tea Party and the Republican-primary voting base, also seem equally well designed to anger his Republican colleagues in Congress, "establishment" Republicans, and organs of opinion like the Wall Street Journal editorial page, and, perhaps more important, big business and big-money donors whose support Cruz will need if he runs for president in 2016. And what he is doing won't stop Obamacare. So it seems like his strategy of alienating his colleagues in the Senate is doomed to failure and he is just being intransigent for the hell of it.

But let's suppose Cruz sees something (or is betting on something) that his opponents in the Republican Party don't see. Then his actions make a lot more sense. He is not a terrorist or a bomb thrower. He is a Leninist. He wants to sow discord among his erstwhile allies so that he can seize control.

Suppose you thought that the Republican coalition is fracturing, that traditional Republican leadership can no longer hold the party together, and that the leadership is too willing to capitulate to its political opponents on the left.

Suppose you are also convinced that Obamacare will be a total disaster. Once in place, constituencies will form that will make it difficult to repeal, yet it will make most ordinary Americans deeply unhappy. Obamacare will be the big-government equivalent of crystal meth: an addictive substance that destroys your health. When the public finally realizes this, it will abandon the Democrats in droves and look for an alternative.

If you think both these things are true, then what Ted Cruz is doing makes some sense. Cruz wants to take over the Republican Party. He could try to organize the Tea Party as a third party, but that is a risky proposition, and it could easily fail. Representational systems like the one we have in the United States, which lack proportional representation, are generally unkind to third parties. It's true that the Whig Party fell apart in the early 1850s and was succeeded by the Republican Party, but since that time no third party has won a majority of either house of Congress or the presidency.

Continue at The Atlantic Magazine

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I don't understand this criticism

designed to anger his Republican colleagues in Congress, "establishment" Republicans,

The people who were most angry with him are people I'd want to see angry with him. Or with Rand for that matter. I'd be more concerned with anyone who had their favor.

And what he is doing won't stop Obamacare.

What Rand is doing won't stop Obamacare either. But what Cruz did most certainly drew a lot of attention to a lack of public support for Obamacare. The people who are upset with Cruz were upset for good reason.

So it seems like his strategy of alienating his colleagues in the Senate is doomed to failure and he is just being intransigent for the hell of it.

Um, yeah? If he's alienating neocons he's doing something right. If he's doing something that would be effective if all his Republican colleagues joined him, then is it his fault that the neocons aren't joining him?

I'm not saying that Cruz is better than Rand. I like some of what both have done, and dislike some of what both have done. Both voted for sanctions against Iran, which was especially surprising from Rand considering that his dad calle those very sanctions "literally an act of war." Even worse was that in explaining his vote Rand just parroted all the neocon talking points about "threat to the region" and so on. Personally I think that Rand believes that, and he's as honest as his dad. Some people prefer to believe that Rand was lying for political viability, a view that I can't fathom in the slightest. In any case, I'm willing to look at any liberty-leaning candidate. But having to add the "leaning" part makes me miss Ron Paul's clarity.

RandWatcher's picture

Self bump for consideration

What do you think of the article?

Cruz creates chaos, breaks up the party so he can grab as many of the big chunks as he can.

Rand has got to keep his eye on this one.