There are good arguments for either Trump or Cruz. For Senator Cruz, the only real issue that he can exploit now is Trump’s total lack of government experience. Of course that seems like a positive to change-hungry voters. But it is a legitimate question to explore before the nomination is settled. Is it really possible, or wise, for the nation to select a president who has never held any kind of high office or demonstrated in that office his real perspectives? And that opens the other door that Cruz should open, namely this — can Trump be trusted to remain as conservative as he proclaims himself to be?
If these questions can be answered in ways positive to Trump then most of us (even ardent Cruz supporters) would have to defer to his momentum and clout and say, full speed ahead, but don’t forget who gave you this mandate and why.
But if there is significant doubt on either question (experience, sincerity) then it becomes Cruz vs Rubio and the fight becomes one about principles vs pragmatism.
That could also raise opportunities for Cruz.
This is not over yet. If Super Tuesday becomes Super Cruz-day then it’s a dogfight to the convention.
“Is it really possible, or wise, for the nation to select a president who has never held any kind of high office or demonstrated in that office his real perspectives?”
That’s a great idea!
Ask people if it’s “wise” to not just elect another career politician, because how can we trust a person not in the club to be good at this job!
I could have SWORN Cruz was trying to run as an outsider.
Cruz vs Rubio and the fight becomes one about principles vs pragmatism.
Battle of the ineligibles
Takes real principles to ignore the Constitution
I don’t know, I early voted in Montgomery County Texas, one of the most conservative counties in the country. Granted, this is Texas, but I never heard Trump’s name come up.