"
On the republican side, we have a solidly conservative, well spoken, highly informed candidate that isn't afraid to stand up to the GOPe and fight for conservative causes. "
I think you've got it wrong ... as to why people support Trump. And it goes directly to what you say above, perhaps it's the crux of the divide.
You think what's above is enough. That is, you are saying 'yay for my candidate, he IS all these great things'. But those things, in fact, get you nothing on their own. Who CARES if he's willing to stand up? Of course it's important, but it gets you nothing.
I think most of us who support Trump agree that Ted is all those things.
But we - at least I - make a bet -> no matter how much of a conservative super hero Cruz is, in 8 years, he will not have changed what needs to be changed.
On the other hand, I think you're also wrong about why we support Trump. Trump is not our middle finger. It's true that we're pissed, just like everyone else. But if you'r pissed, you can just as well vote for Cruz - if anything Cruz is more of a repudiation of both the Dems and the ERepublicans.
But my pissed off response is not to say FU with my candidate.
My pissed off response is obliterate what's pissing me off. Leaving me without the problem, and in doing so, sometimes you give up the right to be right.
We do not think Cruz can end the problem because we don't think the country will move with him or follow him. Pure conservatives without a baseball bat have failed. Correct understanding of cancer does not cure cancer. Eventually you need to take out a knife and use some pretty bad chemicals, and while even still it's risky, it's more effective than standing there diagnosing the cancer over and over, proclaiming how a healthy body should function, and then pleading with the cancer to fall in line with what you've just proclaimed.
It's true, Trump is sharp and stinky ... like a knife and chemicals.
Who thus far has been more effective in building the wall against one version of cancer? Who has been more effective in moving the country toward banning another? Though I'm not for overly protectionist trade policies, who has been most effective so far in keeping the good cells in?
I don't need to disparage Ted to support the candidacy of Trump slightly over his. Mere intellect, credentials and even commitment to curing cancer amount to nothing. You need to start eliminating it faster than it's metastasizing. Right now, while I think Ted would be effective, I don't think he stands a chance at eliminating the cancer faster than it's spreading. We might lose a limb under Trump, but limbs can be regrown, and I think that's why you see us accepting a little more BS from Trump than we would in any other candidate in any other time. The doctor has bad breath, and he might be a little sloppy with that scalpel, but seriously - have you seen the condition of the patient?
Ted will do everything right, and the patient will die. Trump will be a slight nightmare, we'll lose our hair and puke a lot, but maybe we're at least around to curse the doctor in a couple years. Dead men don't praise.
