Skip to comments.
Ted Cruz is the most underrated candidate in the 2016 field
Washington Post ^
| February 13 at 1:10 PM
| Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake
Posted on 02/13/2015 12:09:07 PM PST by SoConPubbie
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 next last
"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton |
|
"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldnt make any sense at all." -- President Ronald Reagan |
|
"A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine 1792 |
|
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams |
|
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams |
|
|
|
To: SoConPubbie
These two guys get it right, where Walker is concerned.
He is the backup Establishment candidate if Jeb Bush fails.
2
posted on
02/13/2015 12:09:40 PM PST
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: SoConPubbie
From the article:
So, Cruz is, without question, the dominant figure in the Tea Party lane. What that means particularly in the early stages of the primary process in places like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina is that he will likely be able to win, place or show repeatedly, wracking up enough strong-ish performances to keep going even as the Establishment lane and the Social Conservative lane begin to thin out. (Cruz's ability to raise money, which remains a question, is less important for him than it is for other candidates especially those in the Establishment lane. His people are going to be for him no matter how much or little communicating he does with them.)
3
posted on
02/13/2015 12:10:46 PM PST
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: SoConPubbie; Kale; Jarhead9297; COUNTrecount; notaliberal; DoughtyOne; RitaOK; MountainDad; ...
Ted Cruz Ping!
If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
CRUZ or LOSE!
4
posted on
02/13/2015 12:11:13 PM PST
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
To: SoConPubbie
5
posted on
02/13/2015 12:12:46 PM PST
by
Kartographer
("We mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.")
To: SoConPubbie
I continue to hope and to pray that the other Tea Party candidates will keep out for 2016, and that more establishment candidates will dispute Bush’s claim to establishment votes. The more divided the establishment wing is, the better.
6
posted on
02/13/2015 12:14:47 PM PST
by
Pollster1
("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
To: Kartographer
CRUZ or lose!
But Scott Walker looks like a good alternative. What if those two had the media attacking them both simultaneously?
Then it would be clear that media hatred for either one is based entirely on their conservative beliefs, giving them standout quality.
IMO it’s good that we now have not one but two Reaganites in the mix. They both drive liberals hysterical so it’s hard to choose.
7
posted on
02/13/2015 12:18:33 PM PST
by
elcid1970
("I: am a radicalized infidel.")
To: SoConPubbie
Cruz is use to being underrated; he will remain so until the last day; when he blows the doors off the establishment, he is the embodiment of Shock and Awe!
8
posted on
02/13/2015 12:18:45 PM PST
by
PoloSec
( Believe the Gospel: how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again)
To: SoConPubbie
The last person the libs want running against Hillary is Ted Cruz.
Why? Because he would kick ass, take names and generally wipe the floor with her.
9
posted on
02/13/2015 12:21:42 PM PST
by
Slyfox
(I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever)
To: PoloSec
He ran behind “Mighty Mitty” in deep red Texas.
Both total votes and percentage.
Has to do better than that to win in 2016, either primaries or November.
10
posted on
02/13/2015 12:24:01 PM PST
by
nascarnation
(Impeach, convict, deport)
To: Kartographer
My favorate caricature of Ted Cruz:
11
posted on
02/13/2015 12:26:05 PM PST
by
ScottinVA
(Communism, liberalism and Islam: Kindred ideologies dedicated to America's destruction.)
To: SoConPubbie
They have it wrong in this regard. The social conservative lane is BIGGER than the establishment lane. They say it is the other way around, and they are wrong on the numbers. Ted Cruz might be the first choice of Tea Partiers, and I suspect not, but I am the quintessential social, religious conservative, and he is far and away my first choice.
The WP refuses to say the obvious. Money is the major issue.
Ted Cruz will NOT get the billionaire money. That will go to Bush and Walker, Walker being far better and much less looney than Bush.
Cruz will get millions of small donors AND SOON or his candidacy will be in jeopardy. The Iowa caucuses are a year away. He gets donors by June or he’s in trouble.
12
posted on
02/13/2015 12:28:54 PM PST
by
xzins
( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
To: SoConPubbie
Walker/Cruz 2016!
And Sarah as Secretary of State!
13
posted on
02/13/2015 12:32:17 PM PST
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: SoConPubbie
I have a hard time believing Christie, Paul, and especially Rubio have a better shot at the nomination currently than Cruz does.
To: SoConPubbie
He is the backup Establishment candidate if Jeb Bush fails. That surprised me at first and my initial reaction was to disagree. But after reading the entire article and giving it more thought I have to agree. Walker is the candidate that the establishment will embrace to a point so that they can say, "See? We really are conservative" while at the same time doing all they can to make sure Walker gets the Veep spot at best. And if they fail and Jeb does a crash and burn then they can move him to the top as someone they can live with.
To: DoodleDawg
I want Scott Walker as President and Ted Cruz as Attorney General. Then when Ginsburg croaks, put him on the Supreme Court.
16
posted on
02/13/2015 12:41:44 PM PST
by
EQAndyBuzz
(Islam is the military wing of the Communist party.)
To: EQAndyBuzz
I want Scott Walker as President and Ted Cruz as Attorney General. I could vote for Walker without having to hold my nose, as I've had to do in the past, but Cruz is still currently my first choice. I think he's the more eloquent speaker and could do a better job of promoting the conservative message than Walker could, and I think that is what will be needed next year.
To: SoConPubbie
I’m lukewarm on Walker until he shows me the money. Ted Cruz is the guy we need.
18
posted on
02/13/2015 12:50:53 PM PST
by
Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose o f a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
To: SoConPubbie
Can’t be in a field if you aren’t eligible. How easy we hold our enemies to a higher standard yet throw our credibility to the wind.
19
posted on
02/13/2015 1:02:23 PM PST
by
TexasGunLover
("Either you're with us or you're with the terrorists."-- President George W. Bush)
To: TexasGunLover
Cant be in a field if you arent eligible. How easy we hold our enemies to a higher standard yet throw our credibility to the wind.
Ted Cruz has been constitutionally eligible to be POTUS from his 35th birthday.
Please provide the relevant sections of the U.S. Constitution that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.
Lacking that, Please provide the relevant sections of U.S. Federal Law that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.
Lacking that, Please provide the relevant rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court that clearly and unambiguously define "Natural Born" as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.
You won't because you can't because they don't exist anywhere except in your mind and in sources that are not legal or constitutional in nature.
20
posted on
02/13/2015 1:20:31 PM PST
by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson