The Patriot Post® · ValidaTED: Cruz, Values Voters Win Iowa

If a blizzard was supposed to scare away Iowa voters, they didn’t get the message! [Monday’s] presidential caucus shattered turnout records in the state — a sign that people are more engaged than ever in the search for the next president. More than 184,000 Iowa Republicans flooded the caucus sites despite the nasty forecast — a 63,000-vote increase over 2012. Evangelical Christians made the biggest statement, clocking in at a whopping 64 percent of the GOP caucusgoers (up seven points from 2012) and solidifying their place as one of the most influential voices in the Republican nomination.

After seven years of watching the administration bulldoze their beliefs, the evangelical force seems to have awakened, and any candidate who refuses to take them seriously is doing so at their peril. The night belonged to values voters — with 61 percent of the first-time caucusgoers breaking social conservatives’ way. And, by extension, Senator Ted Cruz’s (R-Texas). His strategy proved to be the winning one, as he rode Christians’ energetic support all the way to victory. Forty-three percent of the party’s most conservative voters swung to Senator Cruz, who outperformed his competitors across every age group. And, according to entrance polls, Ted won over the largest share of Iowa voters (37 percent) who said the most important quality was a nominee who “shares my values.” Donald Trump, who has baffled analysts with his evangelical support, was a distant second at 21 percent.

After months of speculation, anyone wondering about the enthusiasm level of the values voter isn’t wondering today. Despite the size of the GOP field, evangelicals helped Senator Cruz make history with the most votes for a single candidate in Iowa ever. Like a lot of Americans, the Hawkeyes see in Ted someone who not only shares their values — but also has a record of actually fighting for them. Obviously, several candidates have been offering speeches to evangelicals who are angry and fearful about the direction of our country. But when they get close to casting a vote, it’s clear from [Monday] night’s results that the deciding factor is someone who shares their worldview. That may help to explain Senator Marco Rubio’s (Fla.) surge, after stressing faith in his last week on the Iowa trail. His third place finish, within striking distance of Trump, makes the race even more interesting heading into moderate New Hampshire.

Meanwhile, liberals like Slate’s Michelle Goldberg were eulogizing the social conservative movement — only to backpedal hours later. Goldberg insisted the “Religious Right Is Losing Its Influence” the day before evangelicals out-voted every other demographic, claiming that religious activists were somehow “taken aback that many on the right no longer prioritize their concerns.” No one is quite sure which race Goldberg is watching, since there has never been such a strong presence of social conservative candidates, values issues, and faith-based endorsements. If “evangelical power brokers are losing their influence,” you could have fooled yesterday’s top three finishers, who are fiercely competing to win the backing of evangelicals.

[Tuesday] morning, Goldberg wrote a piece walking back her premature obituary of the evangelical movement. “It turns out that the two things that have always mattered in Iowa Republican politics — faith and an intensive grassroots operation — still do.” And that trend will continue well beyond Iowa, as long as Christians don’t grow weary in well doing. By using our citizenship to participate in the process, and by bringing our beliefs into the arena, we’re changing it! Keep it up. Click here to check out the primary and caucus dates in your state — and make sure you’re registered to make a difference! Also, don’t forget FRC Action’s helpful presidential voter guide.

Tony Perkins has provided an endorsement in his individual and personal capacity only, and it should not be construed or interpreted in any way as the endorsement of FRC, FRC Action, or any affiliated entity.

Originally published here.

ObamaCare’s Bad Exchange Rates

ObamaCare isn’t on the ballot, but the fate of it certainly is. Every GOP candidate but one (Governor John Kasich, Ohio) vows to repeal the president’s failure of a health care system — to the delight of most insurance companies. After UnitedHealth apologized to its shareholders for getting involved in the health care exchanges, other CEOs are coming out of the shadows to blast the bill.

Although Aetna hasn’t taken a $1 billion hit like UnitedHealth, the third largest health care provider is no fan of the law. After the company’s fourth quarter earnings were released, CEO Mark Bertolini joined a group of increasingly vocal providers casting doubt on ObamaCare’s future — and their partnership in it. “We continue to have serious concerns about the sustainability of the public exchanges,” Aetna’s Mark Bertolini said soberly. “We remain concerned about the overall stability of the risk pool.”

So far, the reviews on the un-Affordable Care Act have been brutal, from insurers and consumers — whose enrollment fell seven million shy of the target originally set by the administration. Although Aetna is not threatening to drop out of the exchanges just yet, Bertolini knows the company is struggling to cope with the losses. Like Walmart executives, who joined the corporate cheering section for the system early on, ObamaCare’s supporters are learning a painful lesson: when you violate the principles of the free market (as this law does) and flirt with socialism, you’ll pay. Just as we call on political leaders to advocate and demand free market policies, we call on business leaders too.

With enrollment down in the exchanges and the support around it collapsing, no one can afford to subsidize a market that’s overrun by sick and high-risk patients. If the titans of the U.S. insurance industry walk away, the government’s system is in for an even bigger shock. Ironically, most providers decided to back ObamaCare because they were told how good it would be for business. Years later, they see that ObamaCare isn’t just bad for business, it’s bad for America.

[…]

Originally published here.