Posted on 03/11/2016 2:55:39 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Ted Cruz spent the CNN debate Thursday drawing policy contrasts between himself and Republican frontrunner Donald Trump. On ISIS, trade, and immigration, Cruz said Trump speaks to voters' concerns but doesn't have solutions that address the problems America confronts. The personal attacks and shouting that have characterized the previous Republican debates were gone, replaced with somber candidates trying to hit target audiences with messages that have worked in the past. Trump was the politically incorrect straight-talker who wants America to win again. Cruz was the conservative ideologue ready to take on the bipartisan Washington cartel. Marco Rubio was once again the youthful, eloquent voice of a rising generation of conservatives. And John Kasich is the experienced governor who wants to expand the Republican coalition by reviving the tradition of compassionate conservatism.
If 2016 were like previous elections, Rubio and Kasich would be neck and neck in the delegate count and ready to give Hillary Clinton tough competition in the general election. But 2016 is not like previous elections. It features a black swan in the form of Donald Trump, the celebrity real estate mogul who is taking over the Republican party, and whose rise is evidence of a powerful anti-Washington sentiment among GOP voters. So the race isn't between Rubio and Kasich. It's between Trump and his closest rival, Ted Cruz, who is disliked by his Senate colleagues and alienated most of Washington when he shut down the government in the fall of 2013.
I doubt either Trump or Cruz is likely to win in November. But in recent days I have encountered the opinion, especially among liberals, that there is no difference between the two candidates. And this is a ridiculous idea. Cruz would make a much better president than Trump. It shouldn't be hard to see why.
For one thing, Cruz actually knows what he's talking about. If you listened to Trump during the CNN debate, you heard little in the way of policy detail. His answers begin with a few words describing how angry people are and how China is taking our jobs before ending with a demand that we negotiate better deals. Trump is full of bluster, often funny and impolitic. He's a great communicator because he reaches peoples' deepest emotions. But to call him "articulate" would be an exaggeration, and to call him a "wonk" would be delusional. You might not like Cruz's policies or the manner in which he communicates them, but there's no question he has firm convictions, a grasp of detail, and knows how to make an argument.
Then there is the question of the Constitution. Trump never mentions it. But Cruz worships it. He mentions it often in his speeches, knows its contents, is devoted to the memory of the Founders and wants to protect their legacy. I don't know how a President Trump would respond if one of the other coequal branches of government challenged his authority. Indeed, I am somewhat afraid that Trump would ignore or move against that other branch, whether it's Congress or the Court. But I don't have that worry with Cruz. He may be an ideologue, but he's an ideological constitutionalist. Trump is neither an ideologue nor a constitutionalist. His only principle is winning. And he's not talking about you winning. He's talking about Trump winning. That's all that matters to him.
The president is not only our head of government. He's also the head of state. He represents America. And I truly don't understand how one could think Donald Trump would be a better representative of America than Ted Cruz. Trump is riveting, entertaining, even charismatic. But he curses, he offends, he disturbs, he confronts, he bends and twists and pushes reality until it suits his needs. Having him as president would be like living on a rollercoaster. You wouldn't know whether you are up or down, and you are likely to wake up nauseous.
Cruz is very conservative, a Bible-believing Christian who is fiercely pro-market and hawkish (if not as interventionist as other Republicans). That might upset secular liberals worldwide. But would Cruz be as erratic, would he be as explosive, would he be as unsettling as Trump? I doubt it. The man idolizes Ronald Reagan. Well, we survived, indeed flourished under, one Reagan presidency. Not a bad model for our next president to have.
Who does Trump idolize? Himself. And his neutral and sometimes flattering attitude toward authoritarian governments ought to make you think twice about seeing him in the Oval Office.
The Oval Office seems very far away right now. It's unlikely either Trump or Cruz will be elected president. But nominating Trump would change the Republican Party in a way nominating Cruz would not. Trump overthrows the apple cart. He's already breaking one weak institution--the GOP--and there's no telling what other weak institutions he could break if elected to high office. For reasons of policy, presentation, and character, there is only remaining choice in this GOP primary. It is Ted Cruz.
I agree Cruz would be better - I have trouble figuring out how to get him to the WH. With all the resistance either would get from all the other politicians, neither would be likely to have much difference in”achievements” except via EOs that could be undone if we don’t stay firm and energized through several presidential terms. I figure that whichever of them gets in, there will be factions on FR with the old “I told you so” memes because they really have expectations w/o actually thinking it through. The system is so corrupted that no President, in one term and with resistance such as either will get, will be able to do enough to satisfy many of the good folks at FR.
I wish i had access to their editing skills!
“Cruz is very conservative, a Bible-believing Christian who is fiercely pro-market and hawkish (if not as interventionist as other Republicans). That might upset secular liberals worldwide. But would Cruz be as erratic, would he be as explosive, would he be as unsettling as Trump? I doubt it. The man idolizes Ronald Reagan. Well, we survived, indeed flourished under, one Reagan presidency. Not a bad model for our next president to have. “
“Well, we survived, ... one Reagan presidency...” Spoken like a TRUE CONSISTENT CONSERVATIVE! I think Matthew’s inner GOPee leaked out! ;-)
My goodness he has you people bamboozled down to the smallest detail. Were you a “student” at “Trump University” too? Will you be grilling “Trump steaks” this weekend? LOL
And here I thought it was because you liked the reverb.
I'm sorry, I can't give a comb-over credit for being "real hair." It's against my religion.
The best case scenario this fall, IMO, would be President Cruz and a GOP Congress with a 60-vote filibuster proof Senate (or one willing to change its rules..as did the last Democrat Senate).
The worst case? (and much more likely than the former) —Hillary with a Democrat-controlled Congress.. Hillary Unchained... and with a 6-2-1 leftwing majority on the SCOTUS— in which case you might was well kiss this country good-bye forever.
In fact, a comb-over is an illegal immigrant to the other side of your head.
High school class presidents are popular and have friends. As far as I can tell, Cruz has no friends anywhere and I'm not sure he ever did. In the 15 hours of raw footage video his campaign released on YouTube, even his own family acts as if they are pretending to like him.
2nd, when the Bible refers to “the remnant” I never thought I would be a part of one, but I know how it feels now. Never understood how after years of listening to and reading conservative sources that people were just heading into the black hole (remember that graphic?) and abandoning what they thought was the truth and even more astonishing, that they don’t take a couple of hours and do some of their own research.
They are looking at the golden facade and ignoring the corrupt center which is in fact, the black hole.
Hope and Change has been replaced by the next GREAT sounding cliche as bait for the fishies.
“But would Cruz be as erratic, would he be as explosive, would he be as unsettling as Trump? I doubt it.”
After last night’s debate performance, I disagree. Cruz seemed unable to make a cogent point on his own without going after Trump, and he tried the same ‘fiery preacher’ manner without success in almost every answer.
Do you know why there’s a stereotype of evangelicals as unlikeable, Bible-thumping conservatives? It’s because of “explosive,” “unsettling” incidents like that. Nobody wants to be lectured to by an angry preacher, least of all the Independent and Democrat crossover voters in the general.
Trump appeals to people’s common ideas, which is why people will remember more of what he said. They’ll remember him talking about Islam and globalization in such stark terms.
The intelligentsia just can’t seem to understand why people aren’t falling on themselves to vote for another bought-and-paid-for policy wonk.
“...art department there in Mumbai”
In English, it’s “Bombay”. Some Indians are spelling & pronouncing it as in Hindi, and that’s incorrect English usage. Like using Pinyin spellings of Chinese place- and personal names, and calques long in use in English, like rickshaw, tea, typhoon, Sun Yat-Sen, Mao Tse-Tung (not “Zedong”), and Hong Kong.
“Matthew Continetti is editor in chief of the Washington Free Beacon. Prior to joining the Beacon, he was opinion editor of the Weekly Standard, where he remains a contributing editor. The author of The K Street Gang: The Rise and Fall of the Republican Machine (Doubleday, 2006) and The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star (Sentinel, 2009), Continetti’s articles and reviews have appeared in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post. A 2003 graduate of Columbia University, where he majored in history.”
Sounds like he’s not one of the poorly educated but has experience in researching what people have experienced and who they have become.
As for who has bailed out DT...
Yeah, that’s why he’s the United States Senator from arguably the most important state in the Union and only slightly trailing the frontrunner for the Republican nomination after only three years in office. Do you folks even read your posts before you hit the button?
To be fair, I’m not so sure if Trump has any real “friends” either...at least not ones he hasn’t bought and paid for...like Hillary or virtual “friends” like the kind you can boast about on Face Book.
By the time a person reaches the age of 45. if he has 4-5 good friends , outside of his family, he is a lucky person.
Cruz is a born loser
The GOP donors not Apple or Google plan on backing Trump
Cruz can't win
Clarify for me - what makes sense? I agree with you about profit/cost but that’s not the reality of Trump’s statement.
Just want to be clear here..........
I am a Cruzite. I love the Constitution and the colonial time period. I know that God is going to judge this nation and all the other nations that legalized child sacrifice. It is an abomination and our nation is no longer worthy of His blessing. Our problems are not economic. Our problems are moral. Our constitution was written for a moral people and I vote pro-life. Makes it simpler and I’m thinking about eternity.
Not only is it truly amazing but a bit disturbing that a candidate like Trump can say nothing of substance and be considered to be the winner of the debate because he said nothing of substance.
So maybe if we win we still lose?
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.