Posted on 03/21/2015 7:14:31 AM PDT by Perdogg
According to a Friday story in the Texas Tribune, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas has informed the media that he intends to make a “major speech” at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia on Monday. The announcement has spurred speculation that Cruz intends to either announce his intention to run for president of the United States or, at the very least, form an exploratory committee in advance of doing so. It is an open secret that Cruz, who was elected to the Senate in 2012, is interested in moving up to the Oval Office.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Cruz just died on FR.
There’s a thread that says he might hire a consultant that worked for Mitch McConnell last campaign, LOL.
I really hope he wait’s a bit longer so people will be good and tired of all the other lesser candidates. Wouldn’t that be the smart thing to do?
The question is now not who is running, but who isn’t running? Democrats have what, 3-4 candidates tops? Republicans can have 7-8 at the least. I think that’s a big part of the problem.
Well obviously true - and to clarify, I am not saying either will, or will not, accept being number two on the ticket if given the chance. I’m just saying it’s impossible to tell at this point....and I stand by that.
Perfect match-up!
Of course. It all depends on who plays his cards right, as is true in any election.
With due respect I disagree - at least, it's not necessarily the problem - altho it can become that. Take 2011-12 cycle - when there were 8 candidates at one time. There was still one candidate, and only one candidate, who showed how to win Republican voters while ginning up big turn outs and enthusiasm. Now, he forgot how, but that speaks to his own weaknesses, not the size of the field....because the field was down to about 4 when he screwed the pooch.
...not just plays his cards right...but which cards he/she is willing, or not willing, to play.
If you're a Republican anywhere that pretty much all of them, as history has shown. But in Wisconsin the police and fire unions had the great good sense to support Walker and surprise, surprise they were the only two that didn't have their collective bargaining rights taken away. Now since the Democrats have pissed off the Unions with their support of the TPP and other issues then if the Unions want to protect what they have left they may as well remain neutral or go for the GOP.
I think we have to get used to the fact that they are going to go full birther on Cruz.
I have to respectfully disagree about the fact that Wisconsin is pretty much like any state. It is the birthplace of government unions, literally, and one of the most powerful (formerly) gov union states in the nation. Now - to your point above - Walker didn't take any collective bargaining rights away - he just destroyed the mandatory dues withholding and gave teachers and other employees the choice. He couldn't have done that without winning the election, and if he needed to push the fire/police union reform to the back burner, then it was a wise decision.
Sconsin ain't Mizzou.
...not necessarily.......it’s a bit harsh to say that all candidate support is tied to cronyism.....though much of it clearly is.
And it's been around forever. The Unions took advantage of it under the Dems, they may as well try it under the GOP.
Your pick for the top of the ticket...?
Except for Police and Fire, like I said.
But look at what Walker just did with RTW in Wisconsin.....he never ran on changing RTW - he knew he had to make inroads into the public sector first. He did make those inroads, and then happily signed RTW a few weeks ago.
And he knew he probably couldn’t eat the entire elephant in one gulp on gov unions either. I’m a big Cruz guy for a number of reasons, but I’ve no problem with what Walker’s done vis a vis unions.
Cruz Control.
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.