Roger Wicker’s social media presence is far more pro-Trump than his career indicates.
The Washington Post has an article out this week entitled “Where GOP Senators Stand On Trump,” which ranks and gauges each Republican in the Senate by their support for the President’s agenda.
For Roger Wicker, the Post lists him in the “leans positive” category.
At least in rhetoric this would be true, for Wicker has been out in force as of late demonstrating his steadfast support of the President, issuing press releases, publishing op-eds, and posting on Facebook. His social media presence is far more pro-Trump than his career indicates.
In the one issue the Post tackled in relations to Wicker, the article quotes him in support of Trump’s plans on spending:
“We need to have a national conversation about mandatory spending on programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which are the real drivers of our debt. This is one of the big issues of our time, and I look forward to working with the President to find a solution that slows the growth rate and works for all Americans — including our children and grandchildren.” — Wicker told the Sun Herald in May during an interview about Trump’s proposed budget.
But does Wicker’s present political posturing reflect his past? We can look at just one vote to see what the “Real Roger Wicker” thinks about cutting spending and entitlements, as opposed to the “Campaign Roger Wicker” we see today, and that vote was on Rand Paul’s 2011 budget proposal, in which he proposed cutting $500 billion out of the federal budget, eliminating several cabinet departments, and reforming entitlements. Under the Paul plan the budget would have been in balance in five years, by 2016, without raising taxes a single cent. Wicker, though, voted NO.
So how can we really trust anything he says now? We can’t.
But we can bet that Wicker, in a campaign against Chris McDaniel, is going to showcase his strong support of President Trump. Don’t be fooled, for this is all a smokescreen designed to make Wicker look conservative. And he’s most definitely not.