Except on those occasions when I want to wring the neck of one or the other of them.
(Occasionally both on the same day…)
To me, the perfect right wing political activist/strategist would be a blending of these two guys’ temperament, experience, and point of view.
Erick almost always sides with the insurgent wing of the conservative movement. A good example of his point of view is this morning’s post on the Texas primaries, Ted Cruz Wins Big in Texas.
Matt usually (but not always) goes with the establishment, consistently backing Republican congressional leadership against insurgents like Cruz or Lee. He was an early critic of not just flakes like Sharon Angle, but Tea Party folk heroes like Sarah Palin. A few days ago he wrote Weak Texas tea, in which he analyzed the Texas primary from a perspective Erick would likely not endorse.
Lewis was on stronger ground with yesterday’s Romney was right about Russia. So what? From the great lede featuring practical advice from his mom (go read it there; it’s spot on), to the finish, where Matt subtly plants the flag of media complicity, I suspect Erick would agree with Matt on every point.
This, for instance:
Romney, I think, failed on two counts. First, he failed to clearly define what a “geopolitical” threat means — or to draw a sharp distinction between that and other kinds of threats. This allowed President Obama — a skilled debater — to conflate these two things.
In fact, the only quibble I have with any of Matt’s piece is the idea that Obama is actually a skilled debater. Minor point, I guess.
For some time I’ve entertained an alternate timeline scenario regarding this particular exchange, as well as the Candy Crowley Benghazi fiasco:
What if that had been Ted Cruz and not Romney on that debate stage?
As we know, Ted Cruz is a skilled debater.
How do you think he would have handled these and other critical exchanges?
This idea is something I’d love to see worked out, if only someone could entice Mr. Erickson and Mr. Lewis to collaborate and hash out their contrasting perspectives, analyzing the past, present—and future—of the Tea Party and the Republican establishment from a combined perspective.
I bet Matt would have a valuable insight into what Sarah Palin could have done differently as she talked about Russia.
And I also bet Erick would end up agreeing.
So I propose they write a book together
It would be called A Political History of the Tea Party—Its Successes, Failures & Hopeful Future.
If these gentlemen will write the book and get a publisher, I will design the book for free.
What say, gents?
I either missed this or (more likely) Matt Lewis posted this after I wrote.
It’s his take on the Texas primaries yesterday: Three cheers for Texas
Matt sees signs the Tea Party is growing up.