Posted on 02/03/2016 7:46:01 AM PST by SeekAndFind
RE: First, Cruz did not shut down the government over the budget or Obamacare nor did he defeat amnesty. One senator does not have that power.
It has been acknowledged by both Democrats and Republicans that he was most responsible for LEADING it.
See here:
http://theweek.com/speedreads/441237/fox-news-host-jabs-ted-cruz-over-disastrous-government-shutdown
Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Cruz said congressional Republicans should block Obama’s nominees and selectively fund the government to stymie his immigration order — a move that would risk another government shutdown.
That led host Chris Wallace to question Cruz’s strategy given that the 2013 shutdown, intended to defund ObamaCare, “backfired badly” on Republicans.
So, Ted Cruz did not work well with the establishment because he did not want to compromise on Obamacare.
Is this the kind of “not working well with others” that turns you off? If so, what should he have done?
Here’s what Trump would do — he would cut a deal with Pelosi and Reid:
Well, how’s that any different from what the GOPe are doing now with Pelosi and Reid?
I said before Iowa I could not tell you who would win because I did not think his support was without downfalls being missed but I seriously thought he had the advantage with a whole slew of new voters showing up at the caucus. I was a little shocked it was the scared part of the party that showed up not the Trump fans.
All Trump is today is a wrecking ball against the last Conservative in the race with a chance. I despise that. We are going to be stuck with Rubio if Trump keeps this up because the scared part of the base is not going to be impressed with bully boardroom Trump, this is what has them frightened.
On the other hand, maybe he could mortgage the properties — but he still wouldn’t get 100% of the fair values. And then, whether he lost or won the election, somebody would need either to pay off the mortgages for him (donors!) or buy the properties at discounted values.
In other words, the whole idea of “self-funding†is such a yuuuge crock that only a super-pitchman like Trump would ever dare to try selling the ridiculous idea to a gullible public.
There's little more entertaining than watching a child explain something he knows absolutely nothing about. Unfortunately, when an adult does it, it's just sad.
You seem to be under the naive impression that Trump goes to the bank to ask for money like some suburban drone looking to finance a McMansion.
One thing I can guarantee you, when Trump wants to borrow money he uses the leverage gained by many past and future prospective deals to "persuade" the financier. And I promise you, said financiers know better than to try to bend a guy like Trump over a "stump."
I'd advise you to stick to your day-FReeping, but you don't even seem to be very good at that, either!
Agree the logic is specious. I guess since Cruz got 28% of the total vote, then 72% of the people voted against him.
shhhh I think this is flying over freepers head LOL
Daniel P. Gabriel is a former operations assistant at CNN who later joined the CIA. ....I smell something. It was CNN, the first media, that announced that Carson was going home. How cozy!
You forgot your tinfoil hat...
RE: If you actually talk to people the hype on line and the huge crowds are not translating to republican voters. Those voters will tell you they are afraid of Trump. They will not tell you who they are voting for only that Trump is a lose cannon.
That’s why a lot of the polls close to the Iowa caucus date MISSED these people and oversampled Trump’s support.
One of the most recent ones I saw had Trump leading 34-25 over Cruz and Rubio at only 14%.
SEE HERE:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3391158/posts
Trump Leads Cruz by 9 Points in Iowa on the Eve of the Caucuses — 34-25%
Donald Trump 34%
Ted Cruz 25%
Marco Rubio 14%
Ben Carson 7%
Jeb Bush 5%
Rand Paul 3%
John Kasich 3%
Chris Christie 1%
Carly Fiorina 1%
Other 2%
Undecided 3%
Success has many fathers, defeat is an orphan. It was easy to blame Cruz than the GOP Congressional leadership accept the blame for the shutdown.
So, Ted Cruz did not work well with the establishment because he did not want to compromise on Obamacare.
Cruz was far from being alone. Jim Jordan and Steve King led about 80 conservatives in the House against it. In fact, King was leading this fight in 2010/11. before Cruz got in the Senate.
Here’s what Trump would do — he would cut a deal with Pelosi and Reid:
Who knows what he would do under the same circumstances? If he were in the WH, he would have far more leverage to make deals and he would know how to use that leverage. We have a Rep controlled Congress that makes bad deals with Obama and gives him everything he wants. The Dems took over Congress in 2007 and used its power to strike deals with Bush 43, good deals for them and bad ones for the Reps. Bush should have vetoed Campaign finance reform. Bush worked with Kennedy to double the size of the Department of Education with no child left behind; he got the Prescription Drug program under Medicare passed--a $7 trillion liability; and Bush doubled the national debt from $5 trillion when he took office to $10 trillion at the end of his term.
What would Cruz do in the WH? Would he cave to the Chamber of Commerce and increase H1B visas like he once advocated in two years ago? Would he really build a wall? Would he end birthright citizenship? Would he negotiate new free trade agreements and support TPA like he did in the article he co-wrote with Ryan in the WSJ? Does his ties with Goldman Sachs and the Club for Growth portend future actions? What kind of manager or executive would Cruz be given his lack of an real management experience? We really don't know.
A new voter sign-up ratio should reflect something like the polls, even skew to the leader.
All elections have a phenomenon where some voters sign up late as "wagon jumpers" who vote for the leader because they like to claim they voted for a "winner".
Most opposition/agenda voters are passionate and involved early. I just can't see a big surge in support for an opposition candidate because of that
There is a possibility that some voters are transferring their allegience from "lost causes" like Huckabee and Paul supporters. The could easily cause a 2-5 point point shift. Rather than seeing them as opposition votes I see them as transitioning to another candidate with values closest to their former candidate.
RE: What would Cruz do in the WH? Would he cave to the Chamber of Commerce and increase H1B visas like he once advocated in two years ago? Would he really build a wall? Would he end birthright citizenship? Would he negotiate new free trade agreements and support TPA like he did in the article he co-wrote with Ryan in the WSJ? Does his ties with Goldman Sachs and the Club for Growth portend future actions? What kind of manager or executive would Cruz be given his lack of an real management experience? We really don’t know.
__________________________
Well, we can look at his OVERALL record in the Senate to determine that. How did he vote? What did he fight for?
He isn’t perfect. But I’d say OVERALL -— his record is more than sufficient for us to conclude that he is the most conservative of the current bunch.
He may be the most conservative, but can he get anything done? How good an executive is he? Is he competent? Being a grandstanding gadfly and a pariah in your own party is not encouraging, especially since not one of your senate colleagues has endorsed you yet. Is Cruz the only “real” conservative in the Senate?
RE: He may be the most conservative, but can he get anything done? How good an executive is he? Is he competent?
All the above question you ask of Cruz can be asked of any other candidate.
I am willing to take my chances with Cruz. You go ahead and take your chances with someone else.
it’s a free country.
More likely Daniel P. Gabriel went to the CIA, was assigned as a NOC at CNN, then went back to the CIA, then to the Cruz campaign. ;-) Glad at least a few are getting it.
Thank you for allowing me to make my own choices. It is indeed a free country, for now. As I indicated, Trump is my choice. He is a proven leader and experienced executive who is beholden to no one and been successful in the private sector. It is time to change the paradigm and get a private citizen into the WH.
RE: Thank you for allowing me to make my own choices. It is indeed a free country, for now.
Allow? It has always been like this from the founding of this country.
Obligatory daily hit piece by Straker. :-)
LOL!
When a political discussion is laced with over the top insults, it is not discourse, it is childish. Please attempt to restrain your self for the sake of common decency.
Not when being insulted by know-nothings, I won’t.
You want gentility? Go to Martha Stewart’s website.
You can trade recipes.
Paper tiger indeed...
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.