“All politics is local.” So said Tip O’Neil, the late speaker of the U.S. House.

That truism has already come dramatically into play in the GOP presidential primary race. In Iowa, Senator Ted Cruz took on the state’s farmers by opposing federal subsidies for ethanol derived from corn, the state’s main crop. For his courage, he was accorded the vociferous condemnation of long-serving GOP Governor Terry Branstead, assaults from his competitors and a barrage of attack ads. No matter what you think of Cruz, he took a courageous stand, and still claimed victory in the Hawkeye State.

The contest has moved to New Hampshire, where there is another hot local issue in the southern section of the state. Energy firm Kinder Morgan has proposed a natural gas pipeline that runs through the area.

Last week, I had reason to drive from Hinsdale in the southwest corner of the state to Brookline, in the south-central region, roughly tracing the planned route for the pipeline. Along the way, I counted two Trump signs in front yards, one Hillary yard sign, about 20 Jeb signs along the roadway (not in supporters’ front yards) and over 100 “NO Pipeline” signs. It sure looked like a “politics is local” situation.

So, yesterday in media “gaggles” after town hall meetings, I asked Cruz and Governor John Kasich about the pipeline. I didn’t ask the question out of a great depth of knowledge about the project. My own general perception of the issue is that the New England, at least the southern New England region, suffers from a high cost of energy, and natural gas is both cheap and clean. So the pipeline would benefit the region, but at significant expense to affected landowners, whose property stands to be seized under the power of eminent domain.

Neither Kasich nor Cruz had an in-depth knowledge of the project either. Governor Kasich asked me some quick questions in an attempt to gather the specifics that I didn’t have. He wasn’t afraid to show ignorance. I liked that. He didn’t just feign knowledge and try to bluff his way through. He said “people should have a say.”

Cruz threw himself into his answer to my question with gusto. He’d just been beaten up by the media concerning his alleged dirty trick in passing along to caucus-goers a CNN report that Ben Carson wasn’t going to New Hampshire or South Carolina after the Iowa caucuses, but rather was going home to Florida. In fact, that is what Carson did. He mounted a credible defense of his campaign’s action. Nevertheless, the chance to move off that topic, and the chance to talk policy – Cruz leapt at the opportunity.

Cruz knows the law concerning eminent domain, a governmental power granted under the U.S. Constitution, which Cruz knows inside-out. First, he said he was in favor of energy projects in general under his “all of the above” position on energy. Then, he explained that eminent domain is a state law matter, and that he was confident that the people of New Hampshire would make the right decision. He explained that, most often, eminent domain is invoked in the case of roads and highways, and that pipelines are generally treated in an analogous way.

Then, Cruz said “I’ll tell you what I don’t support. I do not support the Kelo decision, which was a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court.” At this point, sporadic applause broke out behind me. Local readers of this newspaper will know the Kelo case.

Cruz continued and explained the Kelo case, “a case that said that government can condemn private property, not for public use which is what the Constitution requires, but rather to give it to a giant corporation. In the Kelo case, there was a little old lady whose home was being condemned to build a parking lot for a giant pharmaceutical company. That decision was 5-4. That decision was an outrage. That decision was an abomination.”

Then, Cruz turned the question to his purposes, “That’s yet another example of the point I’ve been making that the stakes on the Supreme Court - we’re one justice away from seeing property rights stripped away fundamentally. I have spent decades fighting to defend private property rights. As president I will defend the property rights and the constitutional rights of each and every American.”

With that the gaggle ended.

Just by virtue of the fact that Kasich and Cruz were only vaguely aware of the pipeline issue, it was apparent that it wasn’t a crucial statewide issue such as ethanol in Iowa. Nor was it an injustice such as Kelo, so there was no compelling reason for a national campaign to delve into this particular local issue, despite Tip O’Neil’s instructive saying.

Though he got a couple of the details of the Kelo case wrong -- Susette Kelo was not a little old lady and there were no specific plans for a parking lot on the New London, Conn. property – Cruz did handle the question in an impressive way. He deftly turned a local issue of marginal importance in the primary into a teaching moment on a major theme in the coming general election, i.e who will appoint Supreme Court justices over the next four to eight years.

So, in terms of the contest at hand, namely outshining your competition in the primary contest, this instance would have to go to Cruz.

Red Jahncke (RTJahncke@Gmail; Twitter: @RedJahncke), an occassional contributor, will be providing dispatches for theday.com from New Hampshire this week leading up to Tuesday’s first in the nation primary. Jahncke is president of The Townsend Group, LLC, a business consulting firm.