He’s too radical. Democrats and Republicans alike renewed their loudest complaint against Ted Cruz last week after he announced his intention to run for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. However, as both parties whisper under their breath about his scandalous Canadian descent and shocking suggestion to dismantle the IRS, they fail to see that perhaps the very characteristic they hate most will galvanize voters in his favor.
Born to American citizens in Canada, Cruz moved to Texas with his family when he was four years old. He grew up to attend Princeton University and Harvard Law School. He clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist in the Supreme Court, was a partner at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius Limited Liability law firm, served as the Solicitor General of Texas, the Domestic Policy Advisor on the Bush presidential Campaign, held posts with the Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department during the Bush administration, and now represents Texas as a U.S. senator. Cruz’s experience in law and government on the private, state, and federal levels set him apart from other likely Republican candidates. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, his primary competition, come from medical and business backgrounds, respectively, with little experience in federal administration and no formal legal training. Of course, as Cruz’s opposition points out, experience means nothing if it will not get the job done.
Cruz’s real selling point is not his education and experience, but rather how he has used that education and experience to fight against Obamacare and amnesty for illegal immigrants — two major issues affecting the 2016 election. Unlike his softer-spoken Republican counterparts, Cruz abandoned the murky policy positions of the GOP to establish his own firm opposition to both programs. He used his legal experience and training to file amicus briefs against Obamacare, and went on to filibuster the program for 21 hours and 19 minutes. His actions helped motivate the legendary government shutdown. He also fought to rescind the president’s executive action on immigration by refusing to confirm any new presidential nominees until the president ended unlawful amnesty. No other Republican presidential candidate can boast even a defined stance on Obamacare or amnesty, let alone action taken against these hugely unpopular programs.
Some critics argue that these steps were too radical. Perhaps that’s true. But if he is radical, at least Cruz stands by the positions he takes. Unlike the stereotypical politician, he does not hide his intentions or flip-flop on issues to appease an establishment or to win a nomination. He is clear about what he believes to be right based on Christian and constitutional principles, and then he fights to achieve it. Some call that radical. Others call it honest leadership.
Many on the right fear that a leader like Cruz would polarize the Republican Party and lead to another Democratic president. This fear is not without merit. It could be a gamble to nominate a conservative Christian firebrand, but at the same time it could be a step in a new and perhaps more successful direction for the Republican Party. The time for moderate, “electable” candidates has passed. In the last congressional election, moderates were crushed by their more conservative opposition with clear policy goals. This only goes to show how voters are tired of hearing the same story from Republicans and Democrats alike. Voters are tired of inaction and bickering. They want honesty, integrity, and action from their leaders. Cruz boasts the best Republican track record of just that: Honesty, integrity, and action. Some call it radical. I think it might be the ticket to conservative success.