I hate talking about presidential politics, especially days after a mid-term election, but you obviously can't ignore it entirely on a site like this - particularly now when potential candidates are starting to get asked about it. And especially when an ideal candidate is letting it be known that he just make give it a shot.
There's no point in being coy here. I think Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is about as close to ideal as any Republican contender you're ever going to see, and I'll explain why after we watch this clip of him yesterday on Meet the Press signaling his openness - if not his irreversible commitment - to be a candidate:
I honestly get frustrated at all the talk about other potential contenders based on their name recognition, ability to raise money, perceived ideological purity or celebrity status. A president needs the ability to:
A. Effectively manage a large executive organization.
B. Shepherd good policies through Congress.
C. Challenge conventional thinking and win public support for different kinds of policies.
D. Weather the storm that will come from the media and liberal interest groups when good conservative policies send them into meltdowns.
E. Act with courage and integrity even when it's going to bring heat.
Walker has a track record of already having done all this. You want governing ability? He's successfully taken on public employee unions and implemented more business-friendly policies that have resulted in serious job growth and other economic progress. You want political acumen? Walker has won three elections in four years thanks to the freakout of unions and other liberals who forced him into a recall election in 2012. The left is certifiably insane in its hatred of Walker, and yet he just keeps on kicking their asses at the ballot box.
And he does all this in a blue state.
Any time you think about who you want to nominate for president, you should start with this question: Who would make a good president? That is more important than who you think could win this or that state, fare well in a debate, appeal to certain groups, etc. Who could actually do the job? Then, having dealt with that question, you consider the politics.
You never know for sure about anyone, but executive governing experience in a hostile environment is about as good a test as you can apply, and Walker has passed that test in spades in Wisconsin.
Now, consider the politics. Assuming the opponent is Hillary Clinton - as I think we all do at least for now - clearly one of Hillary's greatest weaknesses is that she has never really accomplished much of anything. She is well known and easily recognizable, but she is nowhere near as smart or as accomplished as her admirers would have you believe. Put up Walker's achievements in Wisconsin against Hillary's frequent flyer miles, her Benghazi failures and her dumbass reset button with the Russians . . . this is not even a contest. Put up Walker's mastery of economic policy against Ms. "Businesses and Corporations Don't Create Jobs," and what do you think is going to happen?
I realize the media will try its best to pimp for Hillary and to destroy Walker, but they'll do that no matter what the matchup. That's why you need someone with such an impressive track record that their efforts can't resonate.
My point here is not necessarily to say that Walker must be the nominee, but simply to say that the standard for a good candidate should be based on certain measures - and on those measures, Walker starts far ahead of anyone else being considered. There are certainly other worthy contenders who have good qualities - people I could vote for enthusiastically, especially if they were the alternative to a horrific Hillary presidency - but my point here is that the ideal candidate should have to measure up to certain standards.
Right now, I think Walker sets the standard for all the reasons I've spelled out here. I am really not interested in "star power" or any of that crap. We have a president right now who got elected on the basis of star power. How's that working out?
This time let's do it right. Hold the House and the Senate and elect a president who's ready to govern - and unafraid to do so with real impact. Repealing and replacing ObamaCare would be just the start.
