????
While they were wasting time killing each other, the Romans were trying kill both groups. But the post was really about the Jewish Roman war. Cruz and Trump together and even Rubio in that package could clean Hillary’s clock. But if they keep demolishing each other, they will open the path for an establishment stool pigeon like Jebber or Kasich.
Depends imho on the grounds they choose for debating among themselves.
A primary is still an election among peers and not a powder-puff social or a pillow fight in the kids' room. As long as the candidates do not go the full-bull personal-destruction route (a la Karl "Rule or Ruin" Rove), they don't give Beastwoman and her media orcs anything red-meaty to use in the general.
FWIW I agree with you in general, but the Good Guys have really got to sort it out among themselves, esp. with existential issues like tsunami immigration and terrorist immigration on the table.
FWIW furthermore, I don't think Marco makes the grade on the immigration issue, he's a definite FAIL on that issue and a probable Rove/McCain corruptee on a range of other issues. Guys who are too ambitious are vulnerable that way -- that's why I prefer people the e-GOP hate viscerally, like Sarah, who imho is the by-God love-child of Teddy Roosevelt out of Calamity Jane and a direct descendant via Molly Pitcher of Joan of Arc herself. </ridiculous American-political hyperbole>
Truth in advocacy, I favor Ted Cruz and suspect that Donald Trump is in fact a typical New York 60's liberal who's mastered the conservative issues vocabulary and may have sympathy with some of them. He may be a patriot and sounds like a nationalist as well, with intimations of Manifest Destiny.
Cruz has questions to answer about where he is now on immigration and shamnesty, and does he owe people at Goldman Sachs anything. <disclaimer: I'm a foam-at-mouth Goldman hater: "great vampire squid" does not do them justice, it isn't sucky enough>