An interesting take on Garland Tucker
Then hysterics of the Tillis campaign AND the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC aka “The Incumbent Protection League”) have to somewhat intrigue you about this guy.
RealClearPolitics is out with an interesting piece on the Raleigh businessman-turned-candidate:
Where does an insurgent conservative go to launch a primary challenge, win credibility with the Trump base, and maybe even attract the attention of the president? The Sean Hannity radio show, of course.
On-air last Wednesday, Garland S. Tucker III announced his plans to enter the Republican Senate primary in North Carolina. “Sen. [Thom] Tillis is going to love me for this interview,” Hannity said dryly before giving the Raleigh challenger his endorsement.
“My attitude is very, very simple: Whoever is going to be the guy that goes in, rolls up their sleeves, and fights for their promises, and the president’s agenda, which I have advocated 30 years on air, I’m for,” Hannity told his 15 million weekly listeners.
Tucker told RealClearPolitics two days later he hoped Trump was tuned in.
The president has not said anything publicly and two outside advisers told RealClearPolitics they didn’t even know of Tucker before his Hannity appearance. But the emerging story offers something of a twist: A former Trump skeptic attacks an incumbent Republican over his lack of allegiance to the president; a primary becomes another loyalty test.
Tillis introduced legislation to protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller, bucked Trump to keep foreign aid flowing that the president wanted to curtail, and wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post condemning Trump’s decision to declare a national emergency to build his border wall. He then reversed course and voted to support that last move, but not before taking fire from the right.
“My view is that if Tillis is a friend,” Tucker told RCP, “well, if you have friends like that then you don’t really need enemies.” […]
Tucker talks about his puzzlement and disbelief over the labels slapped on him by the Tillis campaign and the NRSC:
[…] The establishment strategy, so far, has been to dismiss Tucker as a wealthy retired businessman making an unwelcome political foray after voicing hesitation about Trump in 2016.
“This primary is nothing more than an opponent of the president’s agenda with money to burn teaming up with a past-his-prime political consultant who is desperate to cash a paycheck,” NRSC spokeswoman Joanna Rodriguez told RCP.[…]
Carter Wrenn “past-his-prime”? The man did some masterful work with Jesse Helms. In 2016, Wrenn helped send Renee Ellmers into retirement — despite an endorsement of Ellmers by Trump.
Carter has had his good days and his bad days, like any political operative. But I know I would be worried with Carter Wrenn stalking me while I was a candidate for office. Some snot-nosed, wet-behind-the-ears punkette at the NRSC is way out of her league when trying to throw rocks at and mix it up with the likes at Carter Wrenn.
(Now, you can have some serious discussions about campaign manager Charles Hellwig. )
[…] A longtime Republican donor, Tucker finds this ideological labeling puzzling. One Tillis ally called him “an anti-Trump activist.” He said another dismissed him as “an out of touch liberal.” Neither, he insists, is accurate: “Old fashioned conservative is a better fit for me.”
And Tucker really does sound old-fashioned. He talks debt and deficits, warns of high taxes and ballooning budgets, praises less government and more freedom. It is the sort of Tea Party rhetoric that helped Republicans retake the Senate back when grassroots voters still dressed up like minutemen. Tucker backed that movement, and he later cut two $2,600 checks to the Tillis campaign.
When conservatives began trading tri-cornered hats for red MAGA caps, however, Tucker started getting nervous. He backed Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, then Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and later Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in the 2016 GOP presidential primary. After all three of those campaigns ended, he even backed Ohio Gov. John Kasich briefly. Only after the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, when every other option was exhausted, did Tucker reluctantly board the Trump train. […]
Let’s not forget Zan Bunn and the whole cast of NCGOP characters who tried to topple Trump at the convention and replace him with Cruz. Lots of folks are running around claiming to have been long-time Trump fans when the FACTS say something opposite. (Tillis was with Marco Rubio until the bitter end.)
[…] “My conscience is clear,” he wrote in 2016 in an op-ed for the Raleigh News & Observer. “I am in no way responsible for Trump as the nominee.”
What followed was somewhat typical of the time. The GOP was soul searching and Tucker, like others, was coming to grips with how a thrice-divorced philander who shamelessly cheated on his wives and bragged about dodging taxes could become the standard-bearer of the party of social and fiscal conservatism. Contrary to what his current critics say, though, Tucker was not Never Trump. He voted for him. He urged Republicans to do the same.
“It never feels very good to arrive at a decision via negative reasoning, but it’s far easier for me to commit never to vote for Clinton — and the 2016 Democratic platform — than it is to commit to vote for Trump,” he wrote in the op-ed.
Almost three years later, Tucker is relieved to have been wrong. Pointing to confirmed judges and tax reductions, he said Trump’s conservative record has been “the wonderful surprise of this presidency.”
The newly minted candidate, who has a byline at National Review and a well-respected book on American conservatism (Amity Shlaes wrote the forward), now places Trump in the political pantheon of limited-government types.
“I would say that with Trump, the most important way to look at him is his policies,” he said. “Those are right out of the Reagan-Thatcher playbook. There is a lot of noise and Trump’s personality is certainly different than anyone we have ever seen, but I think his policies have been amazingly consistent.”
Tucker told Hannity that his opponent is like other Republicans who have discovered that D.C. is more sauna than swamp. They get to Washington “and they sit down in the hot tub and start enjoying it. I think that’s what has happened to Sen. Tillis.”
For proof, he points to the Tillis flip-flop on Trump’s national emergency declaration and notes legislation he co-sponsored to put 1.8 million DACA recipients on a pathway to citizenship.
“We cannot grant a path to citizenship for anyone who came here illegally,” Tucker said before adding that he would likely support the immigration plan authored by the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and reportedly making the rounds in Congress.
Tucker may want a wall but he is hardly a carbon copy of Trump. He backs “some sort of amnesty,” condemns mass deportation as impractical, and wants to see an increase in legal immigration.[…]
I can hear the shrieking now over those two paragraphs. Is your goal (a) getting rid of Thom Tillis or (b) electing the perfect, down-the-line conservative senator? And who decides WHO is the “perfect” conservative? (Not even Mark Meadows scores a perfect 100 from the various conservatism rating systems out there.)
You’ve also got to find a “perfect” conservative who can raise money and put together an organization to compete with Tillis’s special-interest lined campaign treasury.
[…] What is untenable, Tucker said — borrowing a line from the late economist Milton Friedman — is an open border with a generous welfare system. And he wants deep cuts to domestic spending.
Tucker sees a little bit of Calvin Coolidge, the last president to leave the federal government smaller than he found it, in Trump, the only president to have owed billions of dollars to creditors. He doesn’t fault him for the federal debt and notes the proposed spending reductions buried deep inside the president’s record-breaking $4.75 trillion budget. The blame, he said, belongs to Congress:
“I really think that Democrats as well Republicans, when they are honest with themselves, look at our spending and say, ‘Gee, this cannot go on forever,’ and they are right. It can’t. We need to make some tough decisions and they won’t be easy, but that’s what we need to do.”
But Democrats are not taking budget cuts seriously, and Republicans have forgotten their Obama-era talking points about fiscal responsibility. What’s more, Tucker talks about federal balance sheets in terms of ethical obligations to the next generation. It is, he said, “a morality question.”
The challenger knows that the primary will be a referendum on presidential loyalty. And he is so dissatisfied with the tenure of Tillis that he is willing to self-fund a large portion of his campaign.[…]
I am hearing figures of up to FIVE MILLION DOLLARS.
[…] He is not, however, willing to paper over his past criticism of Trump. Tucker still regards the personal life of the president as “not exemplary.”
But the candidate also hopes that the race will become a throwback to old-school conservatism, the kind that once helped Republicans capture the House and the Senate. He seems suited to that kind of race.
4 thoughts on “An interesting take on Garland Tucker”
I was behind Trump – from the very beginning!
Principle – over Personality!
Secondly – a BUSINESSMAN – over a buncha Lawyers.
Get beyond the Personality, and we have a Reagan-esque Conservative – that is kicking this country in the pants!
Standing Up to NATO, the [failing] EU, UN, etc.
Oh, and CHINA – that is gouging us almost $1Trillion/yr.
Thom Tillis is Lost at Sea!
(SEE how I finally brought this back around?) 😀
True – I want an Answer to – Why the NEW NORM for Spending is $4Trillion+…
Tillis has had his chance and he blew it! Garland Tucker is not the only Republican, including myself, who backed Ted Cruz and others, but when it was Trump, we had our candidate! Tillis’s many betrayals of POTUS infuriated me & most of my friends. #GARLANDTUCKER2020! #NEVERTILLIS2020
Tillis clearly needs a bonfire challenger for his outright betrayal of the President Trump and his amazing effort to FIX our broken
immigration system and build the wall, promised even by both parties decades ago. Who can trust Tillis at this point?
I’m intrigued by Garland Tucker and am glad you wrote the above piece. It fills in a lot of blanks.
As the Biblical admonition says, ‘hope springs eternal’!
I am sorry to see that “some sort of amnesty” comment from Tucker, but Tillis is a major amnesty supporter, so at worst that is a wash between them. Tillis is hard headed and will not listen. At least there is a chance that Tucker may listen to reason on this issue.
President Reagan called signing the Simpson-Mazzolli amnesty bill the worst mistake of his presidency. The left got their amnesty, but we never got the wall that was promised as a trade off in that bill for the amnesty.
Comments are closed.