Skip to footer

Is Scott Walker running? 5 quick takes from Wisconsin governor's memoir

“Unintimidated: A Governor’s Story and a Nation’s Challenge,” the new memoir by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), is a nod to the recall election he won handily in June 2012. The victory gave Governor Walker plenty to crow about: After his controversial legislation to curb the collective bargaining power of public-sector unions, the state unemployment rate dropped to 6.7 percent, 23,000 jobs were created, and the state’s pension funds are at a surplus.

Walker’s book opens with an attack on President Obama, boosting speculation that the governor is looking to be on his party’s presidential ticket in 2016. While acknowledging that the Republican Party has suffered setbacks, he credits recent wins by GOP governors in New Jersey, Indiana, and New Mexico as evidence the party needs to offer “big, bold, positive reforms that are relevant to the lives” of ordinary people. Among them: “improving education, caring for the poor, reforming government, lowering taxes, fixing entitlements, reducing dependency, and creating jobs.” Sound like a candidate?

Here are five claims Walker uses in his book to make his case.

1. Mitt Romney didn't resonate

Larry Downing/Reuters/File
Then-GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney (r.) shakes hands with Gov. Scott Walker (l.), while Rep. Paul Ryan (c.) looks on before speaking to a crowd at Monterey Mills in Janesville, Wis., on June 18, 2012. In his memoir, Walker says that Romney failed to convey a 'positive vision for the future.'

Walker says that what doomed Mr. Romney’s 2012 campaign for president was that he threw too much focus on President Obama’s alleged failures and not enough on “a big, positive vision for the future.” Walker writes that Romney failed to “get the message of Wisconsin,” which he says was about keeping public-sector jobs intact, not slashing them. “Americans want leadership. And in times of crisis, they don’t care if it is Democratic leadership or Republican leadership – they will stand with those who offer bold ideas and have the courage to take on the tough issues,” he writes in his memoir.

1 of 5
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.