These people put together a pretty good summary:
Ping for comment, criticism or additional ideas.
Bottom line.....I think Cruz ill gotten win in Iowa will haunt him the remainder of his days.
Sure, why not:
Ted was originally my guy. I donated four times to his presidential campaign, and only stopped donating when he voted for TPA. In addition, I voted for Ted for U.S. Senate, in the primary, the run-off, and the general elections in Texas.
So why don't I support Ted now?
TPA
Corker bill
H1-B visas
"Poison Pill" amendment tickery
Teddy bears and soccer balls for illegals
Glenn Beck already swore him in as President
Married to Goldman Sachs
Robert Mercer
Wants to have a conversation about illegal invaders
Homo mega-donors
"NY values"
Me too!
Canadian born (not NBC)
Career government employee
Freshman Senator, wet behind the ears
Iowa dirty tricks
Loans? What loans?
Preachy, not natural (a personal turn-off)
I soured on Ted for all of the reasons above.
When Trump came on the scene, he came out of the gate saying the exact things I needed to hear from a candidate. Even still, it took me a few weeks of studying the man, to give him my support for president. I’m now comfortable with that choice, and have no expectations of changing it.
I concur. I’ve been following Cruz for a few years and am very impressed with him. Cruz has what I call great brain structure.
There is quite a bit of helpful research material, but unfortunately, even when it is a LOCK, like John Roberts was, you never know. I think character is very important and a reasonably good education and practical background as an executive is important. I confess I do tend to rule out Senators first, unless they have some sort of executive or real world experience. Wheeler Dealers are sometimes too focused on the wheeling and dealing and take their eye off the ball. And too often, in Congress, they forget they are public servants, though less so, in my opinion, in the House.
I am undecided always, waiting for the surprises or the unknowns that can crop up. I would have been VERY unhappy if I had made mind up and worked for Ross Perot and neglected looking at the alternatives. That last minute commitment is actually more uncomfortable than being locked in and ready to dismiss any other input, which is human nature.
In other words, a typical politian who’s made speeches in his brief Senate career, a lifelong insider and elite who used his Ivy League education and connections to advance his very considerable ambition but who couldn’t even finish the term he was elected to before giving in to his ambition. 5 our of 9 is a pretty poor batting average but if he’s a good lawyer that’s what he should do. He sure isn’t cut out for politics where you have to actually get along with other people instead of always having to be the smartest person in the room. And it would give him a chance to work on his ethics, which are pretty shaky.
Cruz is undoubtedly a talented and smart man.
However, each time I see him - I see and hear more and more of what I hate in politics. He is starting, to me, to come off as a caricature of the slick politician. Now, he’s no Rubio when it comes to reminding me of a used car salesman, but he’s gone a lot farther in that direction than I had imagined he would.
From the tone of his fund requests, to his recent ‘embelishments’ ... it’s just leaves me feeling a bit ... off. I hope it’s just that he is getting bad campaign advice, but if that’s the case he needs to right the ship, and do so in a hurry. I still like Ted, a lot, and this country needs men like him.
Trump is green with envy. His accomplishments...?
Nice to hear a voice of sanity
around here. Hope you are well.
Your FRiend t.
I will reply at length when I get
off this cell tomorrow. t.
Excellent article!
It’s too sad that so many are LIVs and have no in depth knowledge of the candidates. That situation is what gave the US Obama.
Good article, but (there is always a “but”) the majority of population has a 10 minute attention span. They are products of an education system that values self esteem over reading comprehension and popularity over science. It is a little much to expect any research of candidates outside of Ellen interviews or one minute spots within the broadcast of the latest reality tv craze.
We got exactly what we pay for and wonder why things are the way they are..........
The problem with that resume is that it only tells us what he’s done, not who he is, ie the essence of the man.
Amen Joanie-f! Absolutely and completely spot on.
Too many people in our nation run from one 30 second clip/sound bite to the next and they make their decisions based on that.
The MSM, this administration, and almost all pols know this...so they lead the people like a herder leads their live stock with a whole set of 30 second sound bites, fabrications, and misquote rings in their nose.
God bless you my friend. So very good to see your posts.
This appears to be one of the most thoughtful threads about Trump/Cruz/Rubio I have seen on FR for some time.
For what its worth, which is just this man’s opinion, one vote, here is my “opus”.
Despite Laz’s daily countdown thread, I am afraid I agree with Travis. I don’t think Obama is leaving. I think a “Black Swan” event, war, and grid collapse are in our immediate future.
I am prepared as well as one could be prepared for that eventually. Therefore, I sit here having to contemplate physical survival.
However, it may not happen, therefore I have cast my vote for Trump in the Florida primary. Anyone from Florida knows Rubio’s history and record.
The only choice is Trump or Cruz. I am a logical thinker, my wife is an intuitive thinker. I have learned over the years to trust her “reading” of individuals we have encountered over the years. She nails them. I tend to give them the doubt, and am always proven wrong. She absolutely does not trust Cruz. Since day one. I tried to convince her of his intelligence, his knowledge of the Constitution, etc. etc. etc.... As she read the email spam we received after sending a small contribution, I grew tired of trying to defend him. Then the “ vote mailer” blackmailing and intimidating voters, Carson blast, I had to give up.
We trust Trump. We think he will get the “Blue dogs”. We think he will win. We think he will honor the trust the American people have placed in him and will be OUR President.
I hope and pray he gets that chance. That would mean I am not hunkered down and having to consider shooting my “neighbor”.
Great post!
Can you run on an Ivy League/Corporate Lawyer/Big Government Jobs resume and still claim to be “anti-Establishment”?
Sorry, but the man is simply not eligible for POTUS no matter his resume.
Thank you all for your responses here. I am currently out of town, with a full plate, but will answer many of your comments here when I return next week.
I just want to make a few brief observations regarding the character of Donald Trump, simply because it amazes me that so many friends and acquaintances who I know to be deeply moral and religious people are overlooking, to me, what I believe are frightening red flags, and telling insights into the man’s heart.
I believe there are many other red flags in this man’s policy/beliefs history (and I will gladly debate them with anyone who has an interest in doing that, once I return home), but for now let’s just look at three examples of character-related ones:
(1) We all know that, in 1993, Trump attempted to abuse the Founders’ Constitutional intent regarding the use of eminent domain, when he tried to use that legal concept to force an elderly woman out of her home in order to construct a limousine waiting area outside one of his casinos. The end of their protracted legal battle resulted in Vera Coking being allowed to remain in her home — which she continued to do for seventeen more years, until health problems forced her to move to a retirement home nearer to her children and grandchildren.
During the legal battle between Trump and Coking, Trump accused her of being a money hungry, anti-progress person (and worse) and stated that, because her home was preserved, people would be forced to ‘stare at a terrible house instead of staring at beautiful fountains and beautiful other things that would be good.’
Even today, more than twenty years later, Trump insists that he had every right to attempt to force her out of her home, simply because he offered her more than it was worth (which is still a matter of contention among people who are familiar with the legal battle).
Let’s look at just that aspect of the man’s character:
What does it tell us when a man believes that the only value of a home rests in its monetary value? Vera Coking had lived in her home for thirty years. She had raised her children there before the passing of her husband and she intended to live there for the rest of her life, God willing. Yet a perfect stranger feels (even today) that he has the power to simply declare that the intrinsic memory-rich, nostalgic value that house held for her has no real meaning. The almighty dollar invariably trumps the individual’s right to define what is deeply important, and precious, to him or her.
Trump’s statement ‘They’re staring at a terrible house instead of staring at beautiful fountains and beautiful other things that would be good,’ is the utterance of a dictator. What leader of a free society believes he has the power, and the right, to call another person’s house ‘terrible’ simply because it isn’t being used to turn a large profit, and to declare that ‘beautiful fountains’ are ‘good’? The man believes that he, not an average American citizen, has the ability ... even the right ... to define what is terrible and what is good, even when the object of the discussion is something about which he has no knowledge or acquaintance, and something about which that average citizen knows every corner and included, and personally indelible, memory.
This, by the way, was Vera’s ‘terrible’ house:
(2) Mr. Trump has recently discovered that Marlene Ricketts, part owner of the Chicago Cubs, has donated three million dollars to a super PAC that is running ads against his candidacy. Ms. Ricketts’ donations have been completely above board and were properly reported in public documents filed with the Federal Election Commission.
Donald Trump’s response upon hearing about the donations? He went on Twitter and accused Marlene Ricketts of ‘secretly’ spending money against him, and tweeted, ‘I hear the Rickets family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $’s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!’
Keep in mind, this is a man who is seeking the presidency of the United States, and the leadership of the free world, attacking an American citizen for doing nothing more than exercising her right to spend her money as she sees fit. And then he publicly threatened to expose supposed skeletons in her family’s closet as a result of her exercise of that right.
That, in plain English, is called extortion.
(3) The story of Trump University paints a grotesque picture of a heartless man, who has absolutely no compassion for the innocent everyday Americans whom he bilked out of tens of thousands of dollars of their hard-earned money.
Trump claimed, over and over, to be completely involved with the university, having hand-picked the ‘professors’, and having kept a close watch over the formulation/content of the curriculum, and yet most of his ‘professors’ turned out to be people he had never met, and, worse than that, they were simply sales associates, with absolutely no educational background at all. Two of these ‘professorial experts’ even filed for personal bankruptcy during the time they were teaching at this so-called ‘university’, and few of them were even in the midst of their own business bankruptcy proceedings when they were hired to teach classes on how to get rich in real estate.
As if the empty promises weren’t bad enough, and as if bilking hundreds of ordinary Americans (many of whom are plaintiffs in the suits filed against the university) out of tens of thousands of dollars each weren’t enough, Trump, to this day, claims that this entire endeavor was nothing more than an altruistic, charitable venture, and that all of his profits would go to charity ... yet Trump himself pocketed $5 million of the $40 million poured into the organization by unsuspecting ‘average Americans’, enriching his own personal many-billion-dollar coffers at the expense of the ‘little people’ whose votes he is courting by means of his faux compassion for the American middle class.
The ‘university’ also used constant bait-and-switch tactics, conning their ‘students’ to invest in more and more expensive ‘classes’, and instructing them to arrange with their banks to dramatically increase the credit limits on their credit cards so as to be able to afford the (useless) ‘classes’.
When accompanied by nothing more meaningful than grandiose words, a man’s character comes into serious question and his promises, such as his phony, non-existent hands-on connection to his university, appear meaningless. Donald Trumps candidacy consists in large part of nothing more than grandiose promises ... and angry tirades, or worse, aimed at those who dare question the sincerity, viability or depth of those promises.
Just ask the Vera Coking, the Ricketts Family, and the ‘students’ of Trump University. They’ll tell you an earful.
Well nice post of Ted’s resume but what it shows is that Ted Cruz is one dang fine litigator. Perfect credentials for US Attorney General.
What your post also points out by omission is that Ted Cruz has never managed a popcorn stand. He has no executive experience and the position of President of the United States is charged with administering the governmental agencies of our country, writing a budget proposal to submit to Congress and a host of other administrative tasks too numerous to list here.
So we are trying to decide whether to elect a Constitutional attorney or the CEO of a multi billion dollar conglomerate to manage the largest economy in the world. Can you see how many people find that to be an easy choice?