Skip to comments.
A Cruz candidacy would be a “back to the future†re-run of 2012’s Romney’s failure
Coach is Right ^
| 12/17/15
| Kevin "Coach" Collins
Posted on 12/17/2015 8:37:38 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-122 next last
To: Oldpuppymax
Coach is scummy blogpimp.
To: halo66
Anyone voting based on the âlookâ of a candidate should not be voting the first place...I think it's instructive to note that the first president elected after women's suffrage was Warren G. Harding, another pretty face.
42
posted on
12/17/2015 9:12:09 AM PST
by
Night Hides Not
(Remember the Alamo! Remember Goliad! Remember Mississippi! My vote is going to Cruz.)
To: Oldpuppymax
As usual, Coach is wrong.
To: Oldpuppymax
How is it you do not see the signs of the times? Do you truly not understand the mood of the American public? Cruz is the anti-Romney. He, unlike the last FIVE GOP candidates, is not a pro-establishment, deceptive, quasi-leftist squish!
To: montag813
“his melting face is not exactly telegenic”
LMAO, as opposed to Trump’s “perpetually constipated” face and monstrous combover?
To: Gratia
TV advertising is an ineffective weapon, as Jeb Bush has found out in this cycle. The MSM is overrated in its power; it is no longer 1992, when they were king of the hill and almost the only game in town. Cruz is more confrontational than Romney and McCain, and the usual MSM tricks won't work. He realizes that they are the enemy, and treats them as such.
Cruz will do poorly among blacks, no better than Romney, although as a Hispanic, he will do better among that group, especially in Florida, a battleground state and where Cuban-Americans are concentrated. Also, blacks will not turn out for Hillary Clinton in the numbers they did for Obama, which place Virginia, Ohio, and North Carolina more in play. Millennials are maturing, and like the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers, will follow their path rightward. Additionally, Cruz is 20 years younger than his likely opponent, which is an advantage.
The one issue that will be crucial is the Republican ability to aggressively challenge Democrat urban political machines. Voter fraud cost Nixon the Presidential election in 1960, possibly Ford in 1976 and maybe Romney in 2012. The one time it was challenged was in 2000 in South Florida, and the GOP won the contest. Regarding the 2012 election, the GOP did not challenge the results from South Florida and the urban Ohio counties like Cuyahoga. I have no doubt, that if nominated, Trump will dip deeply into his pockets to hire lawyers and other resources to assure Democrat thugs are kept in check. I don't know about Cruz, who may be more willing than Romney was, but who lacks the resources of Trump or the Bush family.
To: Oldpuppymax
Another writer who likes to tell us why this candidate or that candidate cannot win. Either they’re too this or too that. As if we should only vote on “electability”. I say, pick the candidate with whom you most agree and go with it, win or lose.
47
posted on
12/17/2015 9:19:18 AM PST
by
BlueStateRightist
(Government is best which governs least.)
To: Wallace T.
The only way we will know for sure who will be President is when the votes are counted and the electoral college numbers are known. Cruz could be the best person for election day. He could be a loser.
To: Georgia Girl 2; Oldpuppymax; montag813
To those who understand the varied approaches to American Conservatism, it is imperative that we do not fall into the trap of trying to promote an ongoing fight between the Cruz and Trump supporters. The approaches of Trump & Cruz are complimentary, not exclusive.
Only a relatively small percentage of the public is really ideological in the sense of being able to define a philosophically Conservative position. Cruz is able to appeal very strongly and very motivationally to that small percentage, who are essential to field a strong Conservative electioneering team, but not sufficient in numbers to win an election at the Presidential level, without something more.
Trump, on the other hand, is able to rouse people who have strong patriotic instincts--even if most of them will not understand the strength of the purely philosophic argument. However, that does not mean that they are offended by that argument--only that it is not enough without a more general rallying of the patriotic, to control their voting decisions.
The Leftist media is going to try every trick in the book, to induce an ongoing battle to embitter the supporters of Cruz & Trump, against each other. That effort may well be their best shot at frustrating the last hope of returning America to her heritage. It is of crucial importance that we not get sucked into that effort.
Tuesday night, Trump & Cruz demonstrated that they do not want to fall into such a trap. Those who understand my point should thank the Almighty for that demonstration, and we should all act accordingly.
49
posted on
12/17/2015 9:20:14 AM PST
by
Ohioan
To: Idaho_Cowboy
Anyone who thinks Romney and Cruz are comparable is smoking some pretty strong weed. Romney didn’t TRY to present a message. How could he? He had already passed legislation in Mass doing most of what Obama wanted to do.
Trump? I’ve vote for him over Hillary in a heartbeat, but I don’t trust him on anything. In office, I think he’ll turn into a bombastic Mitch McConnell, making “deals”...the art of the deal.
50
posted on
12/17/2015 9:20:43 AM PST
by
Mr Rogers
(Can you remember what America was like in 2004?)
To: halo66
Anyone voting based on the âlookâ of a candidate should not be voting the first place...
__________________________________________________________
Agreed. Unfortunately, the smoother the talker or the more likable candidate wins every time when it comes to presidential elections. Party and politics do not matter.
The squishy middle of the American electorate is made up entirely of idiots that are easily swayed by who looks and sounds better or who they think is likable. Nothing more. They account for 40% of the vote.
To: Ohioan
I agree. Its time to coalesce around the presumptive winner. It appears Trump and Cruz have some type of working agreement in place. I’m at peace with it.
52
posted on
12/17/2015 9:24:03 AM PST
by
Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
To: Oldpuppymax
hardly... Cruz is not a milquetoast pussy.
53
posted on
12/17/2015 9:25:12 AM PST
by
Mr. K
(If it is HilLIARy -vs- Jeb! then I am writing-in Palin/Cruz)
To: joesbucks
In a quote attributed to Stalin, it isn't who votes that counts, but who counts the votes. The 800 pound gorilla the GOP, with the exception of the younger Bush in 2000, has refused to confront is dirty machine politics: Richard Daley, Sr., and Lyndon Johnson in 1960 or Rahm Emanuel and Andrew Cuomo in 2016. No Republican Presidential candidate, whether Cruz, Trump, or anyone else, will win unless the GOP is proactive in preventing ballot box stuffing.
To: Oldpuppymax
Nonsense. Mitt Romney had his opportunities, he just didn't have the political skills to capitalize on them. Don't confuse blown opportunities with the lack of opportunities.
Responding to Obama's policies with a "me, too, just not so much" isn't going to rally support. At least, Ted Cruz will say something of substance which will stand in stark contrast with Hillary's policies.
55
posted on
12/17/2015 9:26:23 AM PST
by
CommerceComet
(Ignore the GOP-e. Cruz to victory in 2016.)
To: cripplecreek
I’d rather have Romney than this Commie we got.
56
posted on
12/17/2015 9:26:53 AM PST
by
Beowulf9
To: Oldpuppymax
Before Trump threw his hat in the ring, ALL of us wanted a true conservative to be in the race. For some of us that would have been Palin, or Cruz, Allen West or Walker. NONE of these were super-wealthy. Nobody then said we couldn't beat Hillary Rodham Clinton with one of them.
We made fun of Ann Coulter for pushing Romney for that reason.
The electability argument falls flat with me. If Ted Cruz cannot beat Hillary Rodham Clinton with a standard-sized budget, then this country is lost regardless is of whom is elected, media or no media. I will NOT give them veto power out of fear.
I have praised Trump much, will vote Trump if he is nominated, and am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on pro-life and other things.
But this man has given up the fight on marriage because of a court ruling, just like the pro-aborts expected us to do on abortion (and Roe was 7-2, not 5-4). I don't know if its because of the circles he's in, his personal opinions, his assessment of the public will, Melania's preferences, or his sister the federal judge. It doesn't matter. Just as for some FReepers illegal immigration is the key issue, for some of us, the legalized murder of babies and the deconstruction of the foundations of western civilization are central.
I am not saying this to beat up on Trump, I am saying this as a response to those who talk about Cruz not being electable. Both men fire up different segments of the decent people in this country. I avoid tearing down Trump, I really do. Pick your man, DON'T make electability the issue once the man shows he can win the nomination.
If Cruz wins the nomination fair and square, I hope and expect to find Trump doing his part, as I believe he loves thios country more than the current, younger generation of billionaires. If Trump wins, as he very well might, Cruz will certainly do his part to help beat Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Hillary Clinton is a horrible candidate. She is not nine feet tall. She was punked by Obama in 2008. Some who pretend to support might like the idea of getting out under her thumb. The mirror image of Ron Paul, Bernie Sanders, shows how fragile her support is. Blacks will not crawl over broken glass to vote for her. Substantial numbers would "defect" to a straight talker like Trump. Hispanics are okay with her, but might not overwhelmingly vote for her over a man named Cruz.
Let's put up the best man, and demand our country put him in the White House.
57
posted on
12/17/2015 9:29:08 AM PST
by
Dr. Sivana
(There is no salvation in politics)
To: Mr Rogers
I think heâll turn into a bombastic Mitch McConnell, making âdealsâ...the art of the deal.
I just made a post showing reservations about Trump.
I will defend him on this. When he makes a deal with Democrats, and he might, he is NOT going to do it starting out at his preferred position. He will want a 50 foot wall, and settle dor a 30 foot wall, just as Reagan wanted a 30% income tax cut and setled for a 25% income tax cut.
That is the art of the deal, and one that I expect Trump toget right on those issues that he stakes a position on (wall, moratorium, simplified taxes, treatment of vets).
He won't be great on social issues, and he isn't going to cut down entitlements in any meaningful way. To his credit, he has never said he would. He's running as Trump, and he'd win the presidency as Trump.
58
posted on
12/17/2015 9:33:29 AM PST
by
Dr. Sivana
(There is no salvation in politics)
To: Oldpuppymax
Personally....and obviously I hope to be wrong...but I don’t see Cruz beating hillary. Why? Because the country is not as conservative as we are.
That said....
Cruz would not be a repeat of 2012...because he will offer a true conservative alternative to the Marxist cult of personality and death that she will offer.
And THAT is a victory in itself.
The GOP candidate will likely lose to a Clinton.
(Well Trump might have a chance).
But a Cruz nomination will not be a re-run of Romney...not even close in terms of substance and longterm impact. Even if he loses...which I think likely.
To: TexasCajun
“If he would have gotten the votes Sarah Palin got for MeCain, he would be in office today.”
I don’t think so. I do agree with you that many conservatives (esp. evangelicals) didn’t go to the polls (the evangelicals mainly because of Romney being a Mormon, not because of his lack of conservatism) because Romney was conservative enough, but the narrative that Romney would have won if he got the same voters as McCain did are just plain wrong. Here’s the proof:
McCain got 59,948,000 votes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008
Obama, in 2012, got 65,915,000 votes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012
That’s a 6 million vote difference - and I don’t think that 6 million conservatives and evangelicals stayed home. FYI, Romney actually got MORE votes than McCain, by almost exactly 1 million (60,933,500 - see the 2012 link above).
Just a note - I did vote for Romney, but it was more of an “against Obama” vote. I’m not a big Romney fan at all, and I thought him to be the wrong candidate because of a multitude of factors (guns and his own healthcare fiasco chief among them). But facts are facts.
60
posted on
12/17/2015 9:35:03 AM PST
by
Ancesthntr
("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-122 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson