Posted on 03/05/2016 6:44:16 AM PST by CapitalistCrusader
I was thinking about the republican primary and asking myself, "if conservatism is the answer and Ted Cruz is an exemplar of conservatism, why is he not doing much better at the ballot box so far?" Or, why is Donald Trump doing so much better? In my opinion, Trump is doing better because he is proposing solutions to our country's problems that are derived from common sense thinking.
For example, there are thousands of illegal aliens crossing the border with Mexico on a monthly basis. Trump's solution? Build a wall. This is not a new idea so Trump adds that he'll get Mexico to pay for it. Whether he can actually get Mexico to pay for it is not really relevant to his campaign. Politicians routinely make bold predictions of what they will do once elected and then never deliver. The point is that he mixes the common sense solutions with a degree of bravado that adds an air of the traditional rugged American. This theme of common sense solutions mixed with a little New York moxy has been pattern in his campaign thus far. This is what he has branded "Common Sense Conservatism."
Putting all the name calling aside, Trump and Cruz want to accomplish many of the same goals as POTUS. Secure the border, replace ObamaCare. reduce the size of the federal government, etc. So why is Trump resonating with more voters than Cruz? Because Ted Cruz is an elitist conservative. What is an elitist? An elitist is a person who believes that a society or system should be lead by an elite. Only a "true" conservative is able to select a proper justice for the supreme court. Only a "true" conservative can come up with the right plan to rein in the federal bureaucracy. Only a "true" conservative can fix the health care system. The list goes on and on. His demeanor suggests that only he, a "true" conservative, can properly lead, or is fit to lead our country out of the problems we currently face.
This is why a Ted Cruz campaign rally is reminiscent of a revival meeting. Ted Cruz is an elitist conservative. He is as much an elitist as Mitt Romney, as Jeb Bush, as Mitch McConnell, as Harry Reid, as Nancy Pelosi. He is simply a member of different elitist cabal.
But here's a new flash for Ted Cruz and Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin. Conservatism comes in many flavors, not just the true, doctrinaire, orthodox variety. There are many conservatives out here who are secualr, or gay, or lesbian, or even atheist. And we don't like to be preached to and proselytized.
I am a Trump supporter but I will vote for whomever wins the nomination legitimately. But all you elitists out there, of both the Republican and Conservative variety, should be aware that if you destroy Trump by invective you will be alienating a large swath of voters. If that happens I would expect turnout in the general to reach historic lows and Clinton to be the next POTUS. Is destroying Trump worth it?
Had Donald Trump not joined the fray this time, they would have done it again.
Trump is the only one who could have done this.
I prefer Cruz, but I will gladly settle for Trump. The best of all worlds would be eight years of Trump/Cruz and then eight more years of Cruz/Whoever.
It's only a "living document" when that benefits the Dems.
If there was any plausible way to label Cruz as ineligible due to his Canadian birth with a non-citizen parent, you can be totally sure that the Dems will have an October Surprise lawsuit lined up.
My opposition to Trump is based on his record of liberal views and deeds. I also have trouble with some of his personality traits with respect to how they will drive his behavior. His recent flip-flopping exposes some of the “dealmaking” problem I see.
Support of Trump seems to be based in “Make American Great!”, “Build a wall!” and the Trump branding. Those are all based on emotion to me.
For the average voter, elections are emotional. People vote for the candidate who makes them feel secure.
So Trump needs to understand the high negative opinion and low second choice numbers he has. They point to low voter turnout in the general. And I bet they are based on the voter emotion you speak of.
I've never seen a complete episode of Trump's show. When Survivor was the hottest show on television I never saw that either. Trump's program is a small part of his business empire. I do credit him for turning the publicity from the show into a yuuge Twitter following, which hasn't hurt.
Biggest Load of Horse Shit I've Every Read.
Because Trump is a NBC and Cruz isn’t.
What flavor of “conservative” leader does not tell (they'll do what I tell them to do) his supporters that you NEVER TREAT OR TOUCH A WOMAN LIKE THAT? EVER! If you need her escorted out...escort her out in a respectful and nonthreatening manner.
Do you realize the ads’ the DNC is going to run with this video? Are you aware of the damage this will do when this video is run over and over again like the Rodney King beating come the fall?
It was disgusting, appalling and it was NOT CONSERVATIVE IN ANY WAY! You followers of Trump and his angry screaming at a black girl will probably set back relations between the black community and the Republican Party years. Years of hard work to reach out to them and show them conservatism is the way out of institutional poverty.
Gone in a tirade that NO conservative American leader would ever go into never mind allowing a woman to be treated in that matter...in public...for all to see. NO conservative would EVER DO THAT....EVER.
THAT IS WHAT LIBERALS DO!
Why is that? The elitist part?
I'd bet on it. Their justification will be that bammie was born in Hawaii so it's not the same thing.
Two citizen parents with a child born on the soil renders this a moot point, anything else there is doubt.
The Founding Fathers did not want doubt or question.
There is a lot more than having had a top TV show. For me for a long time it was D. Trump AND T. Cruz. Some of the reasons why people I know prefer Trump to Cruz (of course I would not generalize from this): They consider Cruz and insider who failed to attack Obama and has no great accomplishments; they consider Cruz creepy (I do not); they believe Cruz is not a nbc (I agree this has to be settled); they are at a loss to list Cruz’s accomplishments and feel he has been too busy attacking Trump instead of stating why he would make a good president; the Beck factor; and the lies, a lack of credibility, notably the stunt he pulled on Dr. Carson. Why lie about Trump instead of make honest arguments? This last point bothers me also.
But have we seen low voter--or high voter turnout so far? My understanding is compared to Republican primaries 4 and 8 years ago, turnout has been much higher.
Given past understanding, I would have assumed Trump should be finished by now. He often says things that make many--even me at times-cringe, but shortly thereafter his poll numbers go up, not down.
I don't think this year's election can fit in any past template.
Things are really different.
Angry moderates out number angry conservatives.
But not all of them. It is an important point because what we want to have is a discussion about who we want to immigrate. That is what the elitist think they know and seek to provide for us, but we would like our say.
We will elect Trump and have it — thank you, and Trump has enough conservative positions to satisfy most conservatives, and probably it you watch you will see he will end up satisfying the “true brand” of conservative too.
In the 2012 election, Willard "Mitt" Romney billed himself as a 'severe conservative', to mask certain stances he had taken in his election bid, and tenure, as governor of Massachusetts...
the infowarrior
American “conservatism” seeks to conserve the ideology enshrined in the Constitution. Historically the ideology of the Constitution comes from an English-speaking, Christian people. Which is why the Constitution is written in English, and why it concludes, "Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth.”It is often said of other countries that they “do not have” the US Constitution. But in this day and age, anyone who wants the words of the US Constitution can get them. When it is said that they do not have the Constitution, what is meant is that they do not traditionally abide by the Constitution. And if America accepts governance which does not abide by its traditional respect and adherence to the Constitution, America will then cease to be exceptional. And all its natural bounty will make only nominal difference in that regard. Russia has more natural resources, Canada might, as well. China and India have more people.
And all it needs is for America to allow itself to be absorbed by other cultures, and it will be no more exceptional, even to its natives, than Zimbabwe is to its own natives.
American Christians have no obligation to accommodate every other worldview on a basis of equality. Christmas is traditionally an American holiday - and, comes to that, so is (even yet, to a large extent) every Sunday. And even, to a lesser extent still yet, Saturday (the Old Testament Sabbath). When the Soviets took over Russia, they proposed to change the number of days in the week on some pretext or another, but actually for the purpose of persecuting Christians and Jews by making observances of their religion on a weekly basis impossible. And forcing people to celebrate occasions glorifying what the Old Testament rejects is of the same order of affront. Imposed retail rather than wholesale, but . . .
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric? - Washington’s Farewell Address
You and I - and Jim Robinson - count ourselves “conservatives.” And in regards American traditions, including respect for the US Constitution and the freedoms which that institution stipulates as quintessentially American, so we are. But Christianity is just beneath the surface of the Constitution. Dismiss the Christian underpinnings of American tradition, and “fabric,” as Washington’s speech put it, must inevitably follow.
Cruz = anointed by God
Everyone that doesn’t vote for him = godless jerks.
We get it!
Vanity thread? Where's the vanity? It's just a point of view. Where did I go wrong? Which part of may analysis is incorrect? Why?
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.