Ted Cruz Sent “Voter Shaming Letter” To Iowa Professor of Political Science…

The Conservative Treehouse ^ | 1.31.2015 | Sundance

[dfwgator]

I want a mature adult in the Whitehouse.

Good luck finding them.

[fireman15]

[goldbux]

Thank you for posting this here, & on other similar threads.

Thanks also for condensing the legalese.

This insulting mailer demonstrates bad judgment & sliminess from Cruz's campaign. I started out liking him as our only hope to rein in the outrageous Federal Leviathan, but have decided that Trump would be better, as long as he fires all the traitors & incompetents infesting the bureaucracies.

[goldbux]

Nine, of course.

5 / 9 = 0.55555 . . .

[Wally_Kalbacken]

Any campaign that has a chance of being successful is micro targeting - finding identifiable pockets of the registered voting population and targeting them with different communications which are particularly effective in activating that segment to turn out and vote. The Cruz campaign is sophisticated enough that they wouldn't be sending the same communication to all voters above a particular age. Probably segmented by age and propensity to vote Cruz (defined by a predictive score) and propensity to participate in the caucus (defined by a different predictive score). There may be further segmentations (hence micro targeting.)

I'm inclined to think that the bellowing about this particular mailing is being propagated by folks that are opposed to Cruz. Obama for America 2012 used the same method and I don't recall any particular reaction to it - other than a post by Prof. Ann Althouse on her blog after she received one that year.

I don't think they are making a mistake with this, and I think there is a good chance that Cruz wins and stays alive to fight in primaries down the road. We'll know soon.

[blueplum]

Iowa Political Sci professor, meet the Yale political sci professors that led to you being targeted:

http://isps.yale.edu/research/publications/isps10-024#.Vq6lUMv2bKw

[CodeToad]

I see Trump as hand grenade in DC and we need that. A conventional , orderly, intellectual re-organization of DC politics isn’t going to work. We need someone with limited connections in DC. Someone that doesn’t owe so many favors they cannot function.

[Rashputin]

I can see that but when it comes to lawyers, just spell their name right. They want their name in front of the public any way they can get it there.

[Rashputin]

I'm thinking along those same lines.

Whether Trump is a diamond in the rough or just a loudmouth doesn't make nearly as much difference as the fact that Trump knows what the majority of people in this country are afraid of, afraid to say, and know is eating our freedoms. Of course he's very much "in your face" voicing that reality because he knows that's what people have been dying to hear; clearly stated, unvarnished, truth rather than academically embellished Hallmark card half truths.

What we're seeing isn't some coarse snake charmer leading the great unwashed masses astray. It's someone who knows the great unwashed masses are totally fed up and that we're not far away from an uncontrolled explosion. Someone who also knows the only way to avoid that is by channeling the release of that energy like a shaped charge that burns through the social and economic bars the elite few have imprisoned the majority with.

Even if it turns out Trump is mostly just a loudmouth, he's one who has proved he has the brains to find and employ people who know how to reach the goal he sets for them. Even Reagan was undermined by people who pursued their own goals rather than his and Trump has a long history of both avoiding that and nipping it in the bud if it starts.

That may well be enough to channel all the pent up resentment and energy into something that finally delivers most of what the "Conservative" chattering class has been promising for sixty years. If not, people won't have the luxury of gloating over their "I told you so", because that uncontrolled explosion will take place and whether that leads to better or worse is pretty much a tossup. Especially for the well known, well heeled, chattering class.

[matt1234]

Someone needs to explain to Cruz that just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should.

Correct. But anyone running for president should already know that. Sorry, Cruz does not impress me as presidential material. His strident refusal to apologize only reinforces my opinion.

[Heart-Rest]

Teddygate?

[Gator113]

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=slip+slidin+away+youtube&&view=detail&mid=E362DF349FC365B8773BE362DF349FC365B8773B&FORM=VRDGAR

[matt1234]

How many election cycles would there have to have been to come up with 55% participation?

Congrats on asking the $64,000 question: the answer to which demonstrates that the numbers are almost certainly made up. The answer is 20, if you account for the alternative scores of 65% and 75% at post 21.

11/20=55%

13/20=65%

15/20=75%

BUT according to the linked article, Peterson, who got a 55% score, "moved to Iowa in 2009." How likely is it that 20 elections have occurred in Peterson's precinct since 2009? I suppose it is possible with school levies, etc., but I deem the likelihood very small. This assessment is reinforced by another poster on this thread, who says that caucus attendance is not recorded by the state. If correct, caucuses presumably would not be counted.

[moovova]

“Teddygate?”

I like it!

[goldbux]

You’re right. I stand corrected. Must pay closer attention here.

[skr]

Lol, true!

[ShasheMac]

One guy said, “I elected to vacation in Aruba this year,” and all his neighbors who didn’t choose to go along received a fail.

[gleeaikin]

It really looks like a legal warning. At the top in red it clearly says, “Recipient Copy, Official Public Record, VOTING VIOLATION.” I can’t even begin to imagine how Cruz or the responsible staffers don’t end up in Civil Court, and even likely in Criminal Court. What if some old lady has a heart attack and a son who is a lawyer? Boy, wouldn’t that be load of trouble!

Just for fun I decided to see what Daily Kos and Huffington Post might be saying about this shaming campaign. Instead I found this very detailed, long article outlining a number of less than shining performances by Cruz, smacking of McCarthyism, which makes the current shaming campaign seem totally in character for the man. Guess who the article comes from—Forbes, hardly a liberal progressive.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/02/18/ted-cruz-the-reincarnation-of-joe-mccarthy/#1fb1b1bb149a

[Yaelle]

I believed Ted was the person I wanted him to be based on what I knew about him, but I adjust my opinion of someone when there are new facts to add to the evidence. And anyone doing the same simply has to have a less positive opinion of Cruz afterward.

He think s he is appearing strong perhaps by doubling down and not apologizing... But he didn’t insult nameless groups, or another politician... He insulted, shamed, or fooled HIS POTENTIAL VOTERS. That’s the kind of treatment we expect from Democrats. Conservative candidates are supposed to be proving they trust us, the American people.

Also, how can I think highly of his judgment, that he thought this was a great idea, when I honestly can’t see even a potential positive from this nasty mailer? I honestly can only see where it could hurt him, not at all help him. Thus I question his judgment.

[gleeaikin]

FReeper reaction to the shaming story is extensive (over 1100 comments) at the link below and has many link in comments to verification of source, Iowa government concerns on legality of this mailing, etc.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3390550/posts