Posted on 04/08/2016 7:08:20 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Consider this a follow-up to Wednesday night’s post quoting Mark Levin criticizing #NeverTrumpers for wanting to hand the election to Hillary by abandoning Trump in November. Is that an attitude that’ll be universally shared in conservative media or will there be big-name holdouts? Today we get the answer. Stu Burguiere, Beck’s head writer (and the other man in the clip below), tweeted this last night, seemingly in reply to Pat Buchanan claiming that a Trump/Cruz ticket would set the country on fire:
(TWEET-AT-LINK)
Burguiere put that idea to Beck on this morning’s radio show. Would Trump/Cruz be acceptable? Would Cruz/Trump be acceptable? Neither of them uses the phrase “Never Trump” but that’s the clear takeaway from what follows. Beck, after all, is not just a prominent Cruz fan but someone who’s been on the trail with Cruz, and yet, he says, he wouldn’t support a ticket with Trump on it — even if Cruz is at the top. The logic is simple: Partnering with Trump, says Beck, “would prove to me that what I thought about Ted Cruz was wrong.” Is there another major player in right-wing media who’ll break that way this fall, even with colleagues howling that to do so is to submit to Democratic rule? I can’t think of one.
Cruz/Trump is a fantasy, of course, as Trump will never agree to play beta-male to anyone. Trump/Cruz is … unlikely, but not impossible, I think. Imagine if Cruz sold it this way: I’m not joining the ticket because I’m adopting Donald Trump’s agenda, I’m joining the ticket because I want Donald Trump to adopt mine. I’m not selling out to big government, I’m accepting a position of influence in the new administration so that I can make sure they don’t sell out to big government. Wouldn’t some Cruz fans, maybe even Beck, go along with that? If the alternative is to abandon the GOP entirely to Trumpist nationalists, isn’t it better to maintain some leverage by having a principled conservative near the seat of power? Cruz knows how to finesse a position to keep different constituencies happy: Case in point, while refusing yesterday to apologize to Mitch McConnell for criticizing him in the past (populists cheer), he did make a point of praising McConnell for his opposition to Obama’s SCOTUS nominee thus far (see, he can be cordial with the establishment). Remember, for all the hype about Cruz as a rigid ideologue, he’s actually a triangulator in practice. Landing on the ticket and positioning himself as the bridge between big-government nationalists on the one hand and small-government conservatives on the other hand would give him a larger base within the party circa 2020 or 2024 than anyone else in the GOP.
If Trump pulls it out in Cleveland, I’d go as high as 30-40 percent odds that Cruz accepts an offer to become VP. The party leadership would owe him, as Trump/Cruz is their best shot at unity on the right in November, and he’d be next in line during the next presidential cycle if, as expected, Trump loses badly. And if he ends up winning? Cruz is still next in line, except now he’s vice president of the United States. Frankly, maybe those odds are too low. Click the image to watch.
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
Update: A lot can change in a few days. Due in part to Trump’s and Roger Stone’s tactics, Mark Levin declared tonight in opening his show that he’s not voting for Trump this fall either.
Are you going to stick with Cruz trying to cheat his way in after he is mathematically eliminated from winning?
I wouldn’t vote for a Trump/Cruz or a Cruz/Trump ticket either. I will never vote for the lying Canadian.
“Trump will never agree to play beta-male to anyone. “
Agreed. But I look at the primary numbers, and ask myself— if these two aren’t on the ticket, the GOP establishment better have something equally appealing, which they don’t.
Don’t worry about it. Trump will never play 2nd fiddle to anyone, and Trump will never have Cruz as his VP because he values loyalty and honesty.
Thought he burned out and lost it a long time ago and had faded to irrelevance quite a while back, but I keep seeing people posting what he thinks.
I wonder if Glenn would be better if he took up drinking again. I think it’s the sobriety that’s flaked him out.
And such hatred is hardly Christian.
The hypocrisy that Trump is exposing, along with the corruption, shows we need him.
The Establishment has succeeded in breaking the GOP into warring camps. Cruz people won’t vote for Trump; Trump people won’t vote for Cruz. It is now in the ridiculous phase where Beck, Levin and others are demanding absolute purity.
Once again, we have been had and the Establishment wins. No matter what happens, they win. If Trump gets the nomination, one segment of the GOP will either not vote or vote for SWMNBN. If Cruz gets the nomination, the same scenario. If they get their choice and win, those who backed Cruz and Trump will be punished. If they lose, Conservatives will be blamed.
Three of the four scenarios wind up with the criminal selected and Conservatives will be blamed.
Me neither!
..30-40 percent odds that Cruz accepts an offer to become VP. The party leadership would owe him...
The party leadership owed their voters in 2012 and 2014. And look at what happened.
The only ones they paid what’s owed are the country clubs for golf dues.
It might’ve been the alcohol that damaged his brain to begin with. I wonder if his parents were heavy drinkers, too. He could be the “victim” of fetal alcohol syndrome. One never knows. It’s just a pity that his mental illness is out there for all to see. Many don’t make mention of it, because it’s not nice to point out someone’s peculiarities.
I agree.
Ditto!
Beck would seemingly like to back a Hillary/Sanders or a Sanders/Hillary ticket I guess. He should get his meds reevaluated or buy a better brand of booze.
It sounds like a lot of them would.
Alpha male envy.
Cruz is already an idiot... a slimy, Bible-thumping idiot.
but...but...they were Mormons. Those people don’t drink!
Just EXACTLY HOW is being a Globalist a principled conservative position??? Exactly WHEN has being a nationalist been replaced by being a globalist as conservative credentials??
Now "conservatism" has labeled "nationalism" a bad word?
And this from someone who maintains a supposed Constitutionalist viewpoint? Exactly how do you keep a constitution intact when you are a globalist? hmm??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.