Posted on 03/22/2015 9:57:35 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
If Ted Cruz announces he is running for president on Monday, you won’t read much about it here.
Even if he is serious and not, as The Daily Beast believes, only interested in drawing attention to himself, the first-term senator from Texas is not going to win the Republican Party’s presidential nomination, much less the 2016 election. He is a political lightweight whose has managed to alienate just about everyone except the most reactionary of Republican activists with his bluster and sabotage.
Cruz’ McCarthy-esque denunciations of his political opponents don’t suggest he’ll be able to persuade many Democrats to switch parties after two Republican presidential election defeats in a row.
But Cruz doesn’t stop there. If anything, he is more critical of fellow Republicans who imagine they can get away with trying to govern. When Republicans negotiate with President Barack Obama or his party on the debt ceiling, the budget, immigration reform or gun legislation, Cruz calls them spineless and “squishes” for even considering a compromise.
Such remarks led conservative blogger Jennifer Rubin to call Cruz immature.
“It is both self-serving (presuming principles are of no matter to opponents) and lazy in that it is always easy to say “no,” ridicule compromise and remain pristine rather than trying to improve legislation or introduce an alternative."
What exactly, she wonders, has Cruz accomplished during his grand two years in the Senate? If, as Rubin puts it, “yelling at people and voting ‘no’ don’t qualify,” the answer is nothing.
The lack of sophistication extends into Cruz’ thoughts on foreign policy. The American Conservative‘s Daniel Larison points out that Cruz is usually “in lockstep with hardliners when it comes to (wrongly) assessing threats and reliably endorsing the use of force” without displaying the faintest interest in any of the political conditions of the countries he wants to bomb.
“The fact that Cruz thinks bombing anyone back to the “stone age” is the right way to combat terrorism shows that he prizes sounding tough and belligerent over giving any thought to the consequences and efficacy of the military action he supports.
Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin nevertheless cautions against writing Cruz off, saying he is “much smarter” in private than “the caricature painted by East Coast media elites” suggests. If that is the case, it seems rather Cruz had made the caricature of himself.
The Texan is also a “serious organizer with old and new media skills and a strong work ethic,” according to Halperin who believes he could come out on top in Iowa, the first caucus state.
Maybe. But Iowan Republicans haven’t been very good at electing presidents lately.
In 2012, Rick Santorum won the Republican caucus in Iowa. Four years earlier, Mike Huckabee prevailed. Neither was ever a viable general election contender. John McCain came in fourth in 2008; Mitt Romney placed second last time. They went on to win the nomination.
Cruz may command the adoration of ideological zealots who play an outsized role in Republican primaries but even Halperin knows he lacks all the necessary qualities to become the nominee. Cruz has no concrete agenda, no establishment support, no crossover appeal, seemingly no sense of humor, no concrete signs that he can turn base support into rising poll standing and no general election credibility — whatsoever.
Add to that a tendency to lie or make things up (according to Politifact, barely a fifth of the things Cruz says are actually true or mostly true) and it’s clear we shouldn’t pretend Ted Cruz is anything more than a sideshow.
Notice his sources? I guess he forgot that Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter all went on to the White House from Iowa?
I threw his name into the keywords. Nick Ottens.
Just for posterity.
“If Ted Cruz announces he is running for president on Monday, you won’t read much about it here.”
Good. No one wants to hear/read the ranting and raving of the delusional.
So Nick, I guess you will just have to vote for Hillery then. (As if there was any other choice.)
Obviously Nick Ottens is such a racist who can’t stand Hispanic-Americans trying to improve their conditions.
Nick, you ignorant slut.
When have first term Senators ever been considered to be Presidential material?
Actually, if you took out Cruz’s name from the article and substituted Obama’s name...the article would have the same weight and twist to it.
Generally, whoever wins in Iowa....wins the convention situation and at represents his party. I can generally predict this...Jeb Bush won’t get first-place in Iowa. It’s strictly between Cruz and Walker there. And I’ll predict that Jeb Bush doesn’t win in SC...it’ll also be a Cruz or Walker win there.
Abraham Lincoln served one two year term in the House of Representatives years before he was elected president. Next question?
Who says that Nick, a Dutchman, can even vote here?
Last year would be my guess.
I think I will be ignoring Nick Ottens, starting by not reading this article.
Nick Ottens, another dime-a-dozen writer of useless drivel.
Ping.
The Atlantic ‘anything” is always ahead of the curve...they have teams operating everywhere ‘ready’ to pounce.
According to Nick, a LOT of people have said stuff about Ted Cruz. Some were concerned with things he’s said, while others took him to task for what he hasn’t said. That; coupled with the fact that he has absolutely no experience whatsoever in being a United States President, should be enough to dissuade him from running for office.
“When have first term Senators ever been considered to be Presidential material?”
When someone comes along who has the testicular fortitude to stand up for the Constitution; actually represent his constituents’ wishes and demands; and best of all, doesn’t give a rat’s butt that doing those two things will make him the target of Democrats, RINOs, and most of the 4th Estate. That’s when. This next election, if we have one, will be for keeps. We either restore our Liberty or we bow down to the Marxist gods.
And who do YOU want as a candidate who will fight to preserve our Constitution??
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.