Posted on 01/02/2016 2:39:19 AM PST by Michael van der Galien
Ted Cruz isn't only surging in the polls -- he's now in second place nationally and leads in Iowa -- he is also raising a truckload of money. In the last quarter of 2015 alone the Republican presidential candidate received almost $20 million from his supporters.
Not bad for a grassroots candidate who's despised and hated by his own party's leadership team.
Small wonder then that Cruz bragged about these results during a phone call with supporters, adding that he's confident he'll be the Republican nominee -- soon:
"There’s a very good possibility that the Republican primary will be decided by the end of March."
That doesn't mean, however, that he believes it's going to be an easy ride. Quite the opposite in fact: he also warned his supporters to get ready for an epic battle, telling them it would get "uglier and uglier and uglier."
"We’re winning right now, and as a result, I want to tell everyone to get ready. Strap on the full armor of God. Get ready for the attacks that are coming. We’ve already seen hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars in attacks directed at us. Well I went to tell you that come the month of January, we ain’t seen nothing yet."
He added:
"I want to encourage everyone to get ready, because starting tomorrow morning, we are in a 90-day sprint to win this nomination, and then to turn around and win the general election. To defeat Hillary Clinton in November of 2016 and to turn this country around."
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Say what??? Reagan had been governor of the largest state for two terms, and had been giving speeches laying out his conservative principles for two decades before he became President. Anyone who had been paying any attention at all knew very well what we were getting with Reagan. Not so with Trump. His positions have changed so much on so many issues, many of them just in the most recent election cycle. Maybe those changes are sincere and lasting, but we have no way of judging.
Fossil I agree with your post 163.
you know you didn’t have to come in and protect your boi friend, or maybe you did. But he is obsessed (or is it a she) with one off hand comment I made a month ago about a single blogger. I mean HE is the one who still brings it up.
I”m sorry, that is not my experience with TCT....or sundance. I find his writing sophomoric and shallow - hardly analyitcally genius. Then again, look who I’m talking to...a fiction writer. All the time...
And hurried to post some Bible verses, LOL.
Although, to be fair, considering the poster---she's probably staring at her screen, going "Wha--?", trying to figure out what we mean.
in your microscopic understanding of business, you apparently don’t even under stand the concept of CONTRACTORS - who are the ones who really get screwed in bankruptcies.
Besides, are you saying it’s okay for DT to fail as long as he’s only screwing rich investors???? Wow you have a sick demented notion of business - based on, well, a total unfamiliarity.
Don’t hurt yourslef. Put down your shovel.
“in your microscopic understanding of business, you apparently don’t even under stand the concept of CONTRACTORS - who are the ones who really get screwed in bankruptcies.”
Understanding of business?
Contractors are hired by the developers. Contractors DO NOT pony up money for a particular development. When a bankruptcy occurs, the contractors are laid off.
“Besides, are you saying it’s okay for DT to fail as long as he’s only screwing rich investors????”
You ask a loaded question...supply your own answer, and then draw a conclusion based on your own answer. That is childish.
” Wow you have a sick demented notion of business - based on, well, a total unfamiliarity.”
No, I don’t think it is okay to screw rich investors, but do you have proof that Trump went into the investment with that idea in mind?
Total unfamiliarity? I have worked for contractors for many years.
“Just tell me that if Ted Cruz is on the Republican ticket in November you will go out and vote for him. We thought Richard Nixon was a Conservative and he gave us the EPA!”
Yes, we hope and pray we have the opportunity to vote for Ted Cruz for President in 2016 and we are doing all we can to help him get the nomination. I voted for Richard Nixon and given his opponents, Hubert Humphrey and George McGovern I would do so again even with the foresight of Watergate and the EPA.
And hurried to post some Bible verses, LOL.
Remember in Matthew Chapter 4 Satan quoted scripture.
Very true
No answer? Just “duh”?
Trump fan, keeping it classy.
contractors are who got screwed in some of the Trump bankruptcies...contractors do indeed pony up...they buy materials and pay labor UP FRONT and then bill for their work - against a draw if it’s long term project. Contractors are who get screwed in almost all business bankruptcies. So do other vendors of all kinds and often investors....but normally investors are SHARING THE RISK not doing fee for service work.
Again, you do not understand business. I simply cannot believe you have any experience in contracting based on your comments.
What this world (and this website too) needs is more cat-herders.
Iowa Ted wears his armor of God while in Iowa. But New York Ted wears his sleazy politician suit on when in New York smoozing with his donors.
Sorry if Sundance makes you jealous! His analytical skills and gifts are virtually nonpareil.
Translated into Bidenese: "Gird your loins!"
“We thought Nixon was conservative and he gave us the EPA”
Nixon created the EPA to eliminate needless and wasteful duplication among Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, and HEW in enforcement of laws passed by Congress. To get an idea of the scope of the problem Congress has created, consider these laws the President is charged with enforcing:
Air
1955: Air Pollution Control Act PL 84-159
1963: Clean Air Act PL 88-206
1965: Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act PL 89-272
1966: Clean Air Act Amendments PL 89-675
1967: Air Quality Act PL 90-148
1970: Clean Air Act Extension PL 91-604
1977: Clean Air Act Amendments PL 95-95
1990: Clean Air Act Amendments PL 101-549
Water
1948: Water Pollution Control Act PL 80-845
1965: Water Quality Act PL 89-234
1966: Clean Waters Restoration Act PL 89-753
1970: Water Quality Improvement Act PL 91-224
1972: Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972 PL 92-500
1974: Safe Drinking Water Act PL 93-523
1977: Clean Water Act PL 95-217
1987: Water Quality Act PL 100-4
1996: Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996
Land
1964: Wilderness Act PL 88-577
1968: Wild and Scenic Rivers Act PL 90-542
1970: Wilderness Act PL 91-504
1977: Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act PL 95-87
1978: Wilderness Act PL 98-625
1980: Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act PL 96-487
1994: California Desert Protection Act PL 103-433
2010: California Desert Protection Act
Endangered species
1946: Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act PL 79-732
1966: Endangered Species Preservation Act PL 89-669
1969: Endangered Species Conservation Act PL 91-135
1972: Marine Mammal Protection Act PL 92-522
1973: Endangered Species Act PL 93-205
1979: Endangered Species Preservation Act PL 95 335
Hazardous waste
1965: Solid Waste Disposal Act PL 89-272
1970: Resource Recovery Act PL 91-512
1976: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act PL 94-580
1980: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (”Superfund”) PL 96-510
1984: Hazardous and Solid Wastes Amendments Act PL 98-616
1986: Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act PL 99-499
2002: Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (”Brownfields Law”) PL 107-118
Other
1947: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act PL 80-104
1969: National Environmental Policy Act PL 91-190
1972: Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act PL 92-516
1976: Toxic Substances Control Act PL 94-469
1982: Nuclear Waste Repository Act PL 97-425
1996: Food Quality Protection Act PL 104-170
Congress has delegated lawmaking powers to the Executive Branch for many years, with increasingly vague and increasingly broad proclamations of policy, or fantasy, masquerading as law.
Just as there is no such thing as “Islamism”, there is only Islam,there is no “EPA tyranny”, only EPA enforcement of what Congress has enacted and Presidents have signed.
The fact that those “laws” create tyranny isn’t Obama’s fault, or the EPA’s fault. It’s Congress’s fault, and ultimately ours.
dude you’re on crack....if that were true, he wouldn’t hide behind a screen name. Then again, maybe you have a very low bar. In fact, I’m sure you do.
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.