Go Cruz!
It's a little early to be writing the obituary. He's a formidable guy, just brilliant. He has a plan, he's working the plan and we'll see how it turns out.
.
This is not a conservative site.
Just calling it The conservative Treehouse won’t fill the bill.
These clowns are always ragging against conservatives and conservative positions.
I am encouraged by the fact that they are concern trolling Cruz. It means that they see him as a real threat to their wishy-washy politics. (He is indeed!)
Enough of these Bub Dull supporters.
.
"There’s a reason why the recent CBS survey approached their polling questions with head-to-head match-ups yet excluded Ted Cruz specifically. It appears to be the same reason why the GOPe media constructs within Park Row allow the narrative of Cruz, as told by Johnson, to remain unblemished. By not contrasting them, they retain the air of possibility. There’s a motive inside that retention having nothing to do with Cruz per se’".
So CBS, by not givings a head to head to poll against Hillary is doing their bit to sustain his candidacy.
Really. Our old friend CBS helping the most conservative candidate in the race. Somehow I don't think so. In fact the article is just a hit piece on Cruz. He was 3rd in the most recent poll. That same CBS poll. I think CBS had quite another reason for not giving us the Cruz vs. Clinton results.
Full article states: “What it essentially says is there’s a need to affirm something that isn’t factually supported by any measure of quantifiable empirical evidence.” Then, eight paragraphs later, goes on to attempt reinforcement of this premise with unsupported— and unsupportable— assumptions:
“It is highly doubtful that Diamond and Silk, would be “Stumping for Cruz”, or anything similar. It’s actually beyond doubtful, it’s a ridiculous proposition. Nor would there be thousands of Democrats changing their party affiliation to Republican to support Cruz in the primary elections.”
Entire “article” is based upon the premise that a CBS poll shows the true nature of the will of Republican primary voters. Yet the poll was not conducted in such a way as to accurately portray the stances of those same voters. The most simplistic inquiry into the methodology provides this glaring error:
“This poll was conducted by telephone October 4-8, 2015 among a random sample of 1,251 adults nationwide, including 1,038 registered voters. Data collection was conducted on behalf of CBS News by SSRS of Media, PA. Phone numbers were dialed from samples of both standard land-line and cell phones. The poll employed a random digit dial methodology. For the landline sample, a respondent was randomly selected from all adults in the household. For the cell sample, interviews were conducted with the person who answered the phone. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish using live interviewers”
Please note the small polling size for a national poll, the lack of targeted demographics ( “registered voters” do not = likely voters) and the fact that party affiliation of respondents was not listed.
If “sundance” wishes to be taken seriously, especially when taking on Mr. Johnson and attacking his credibility on election issues, I will demand for more substance to a rebuttal than “Ted Cruz once handed out teddy bears with Glenn Beck”.
Trump and Carson are the “Round-Up” that can deal with the weeds and make the farmland a place where the seed stock will grow.
Don’t get me wrong, if Cruz ends up being the nominee this go around he has my vote, but I think that a Trump victory is needed to set the stage for a Cruz win 4 or 8 years later.
I like Cruz. He’s one of my top three to vote for. However, what worries me is that no one is talking about the very large Maple leaf in the room that needs to be addressed in regards to his eligibility. I worry that the Dims are waiting to have him become the candidate before they address, no make that attack it.
Ted Cruz has been overshadowed by the charisma and media savvy of Donald Trump.
That said, in a race without Donald, Ted is electable and is highly valued as a candidate that America needs.
But Donald is in the race and has taken much of Ted’s support base. But not all is lost. In fact, nothing is lost.
If you believe, as I do, that everything happens for a reason, as written by God, then the advent of Donald Trump is a blessing to Ted Cruz.
Donald is 69, Ted is 44.
Ted as the GOP candidate can garner up to 52% of the vote, but that’s only if people come to vote against the democrats. Whatever the case may be, it’s not enough.
Donald as the GOP candidate can garner near 60% because he is attractive to LIVs and dem voter blocs. He wins a landslide which is what is needed to stop the democrat’s hard-core leftist agenda.
What Ted Cruz needs to do is to continue keeping his poll numbers rising. He should garner a solid 15% in the primaries and he has the funds to go all the way.
Donald Trump will garner a solid 35% or more in the primaries, then it becomes possible that he should select Ted Cruz as his running mate. Ted as VP will allow him to grow on America.
Where does that leave Carson? Surgeon General? No. Ben Carson would be wasted on such a post. Secretary of State? No. He doesn’t have the negotiating skills that Donald requires. Actually, the mostly ceremonial post of VP would suit him.
Where then does that leave Ted? Appointment as SC Justice? No, though it seems logical, Ted really wants to gain executive experience and be President. If not VP because of Carson, then what? Ted needs to spend the first term of Donald Trump’s presidency building his reputation as a hard-line badass. Under Donald’s wing, Ted can get his marching orders and negotiate diplomatically as Secretary of State while interfacing with Donald’s chosen trade delegation team. Building a reputation in foreign policy as a hard-liner will prepare Ted as either Donald’s 2nd term VP pick or as a presidential candidate when Donald leaves office.
This is a rather silly article. Cruz is, while not perfect, the best candidate I've seen in decades. And yet he polls single digits. Fine, we understand we have two problems: one, Trump sucks most of the air out of the room, and two, the remaining field is highly fractured.
So if you ask "is he electable", if you can do math you have to admit its a long shot. The writer implies that there is something wrong with Cruz supporters recognizing the arithmetic challenge they face. We get it. Cruz gets it. He is prepared to continue on regardless. He has the finances, he has the organization, he has the debating chops if he can ever get a question to answer, and looking down the road he is one of the best qualified men for the job to hit the ground running from day one.
One more thing: Cruz supporters are generally favorable toward Trump and Trump supporters are generally positive toward Cruz. Either one stumbles, the other one receives a goodly part of that support.
I read it and it appears the writer thinks Cruz is too much of a Christian to win and he needs to move to the center to get enough votes to win. That would be like McCain and Romney - I forget what their terms as president were like - oops, they didn’t win.
The writer also dumped on David Barton, who is working with Cruz in campaign finance. Barton is a magnificent historian who was the Vice Chair of the Texas Republican Party for a number of years when I was working with the party and I admire this Christian man and the work he does. I found out from him something I didn’t know about our Texas Republican Party. The man who started our state party was a black man from Galveston, Texas.
Let’s wait until after Iowa to see the ratings then.
He’s absolutely right on why it looks now like Cruz can’t win:
“In order to win support of the scope and scale necessary to win a national election, you first have to appeal on a platform supported by a national electorate.”
But Cruz ‘may’ develop that appealing platform in the coming budget/spending/debt battles in congress.
That’s a seemingly impossible ‘row to hoe’.
No one’s ever been able to surmount the media narratives against fiscal responsibility, but he’s known from the beginning that upsetting the usual narrative then would be necessary to run as a conservative.