Credit to Pookie18
Posted on 04/19/2016 11:49:04 AM PDT by pgyanke
Credit to Pookie18
I don't know about you but I'm sick and tired of this election season. FR has turned into a bickering board of bitter bubbleheads, it seems. Where we used to see Ted Cruz as a principled conservative... we now attack anyone who likes him as a "Cruzite" or "Cruzombie"... what happened?
First, there was the attack against him that he played dirty tricks in Iowa by relaying an MSM message that Carson was leaving the race. What would you do? If you are in a popularity contest against multiple opponents, wouldn't you make sure that the votes of an ideological brother weren't wasted on a failed effort? It's a logical reasoning... and you don't have days to debate it in committee, you have minutes and seconds before votes are tallied. That Cruz apologized at all for this news media-inspired fiasco shows him to be the bigger man.
Then what? He's following the rules and gathering delegates? I thought we wanted someone who knows how the game is played and can win elections... silly me. The Trump supporters don't seem to realize that DT is not the closer he claims to be. He is riding a wave of populism but is losing on the rules because he is disorganized and unprepared.
Saying all of this doesn't mean I am anti-Trump... I am anti-Dem whether the Dem is Hillary, Bernie, or Biden. Doesn't matter to me. If Trump is the eventual nominee, he will get my vote to stop the Dem machine's destruction of our great country.
In the primary, though, I want the most conservative in the race who has shown he knows how to win. That man is Ted Cruz. Why he is slimed on a conservative board is beyond me... and it saddens me. Maybe he isn't your guy... fine. Why does he have to be slimed? If he does manage to pull out an upset... what have you accomplished but hurting our best chance for conservative restoration in this country?
THEY are the ones dragging this out. At some point it strains our patience.
“But damning Cruz to hell with nasty words and imagery ... is something completely different.”
Wait! What?? You mean this isn’t aceptable?.............................What about when David Barton and all those Kingdom Now Seven Mountains Dominion priests were praying over Ted and they said ‘every tongue that rises up against him in judgement will be condemned’? Praying for God to do the dirty deed for them.
Personally, I don’t think any of us are qualified to damn people and I REALLY don’t think that’s the kind of prayer I would offer up to God to help us get a leader.
For lots of reasons.
>> He decided to play a conservative, because he figured that would get him elected president.
Well then, Ted’s been “playing conservative” for a helluva long time.
Story after story, anecdote after anecdote, quote after quote, picture after picture of Trump and his liberal past have surfaced.
On Cruz? Zip. Zilch. Nada about a liberal past.
Did he get his epiphany in the fifth grade, maybe? Perhaps you could go to his third grade teacher, then, and get some crayon drawings to bolster your claim.
... Maybe you’re confused and you’re really thinking of Trump as the recent liberal to conservative flip-flopper.
A lot of folks who liked Cruz (my brother was a very big fan going way back) have backed away backed on what they have seen.
Now if You still support Cruz as your # 1 candidate I can certainly understand why but realize other folks can look at an issue that does not affect you and form another conclusion.
In the case of the 2012 loan, the fundamental issue folks have seems to revolve around the following:
The narrative Cruz presented to the voters is he liquidated his assets, not that his campaign took a loan out secured by his assets. That distinction matters to some observers. Why you ask? Three reasons:
1) By taking a loan out against his assets he does not lose said assets: that is contributors can give his re-election campaign contributions which are used to repay the loan. That is what happened, he never liquidated any of the assets borrowed against to repay the loan, it was paid by donations to his reelection fund. Had he liquidated the assets like he said he did , they would be gone forever, he could not have paid himself back. Effectively he would have donated those assets to his own campaign.
3) He was and is playing the outsider. Part of that narrative is that the plucky outsider used his own money to fight the system and get elected. When it turns out he got ends the old fashioned way that narrative crashes, and he becomes yet another politician who has taken money to get elected and is beholden to a specific set of interests. You may well still believe that he is an outsider, to some this action indicates otherwise and that is a reasonable assumption.
3) It appears to some he deliberately hide this loan: Now it might have been a mistake, but if so it was a mistake that allowed an errant narrative to be used by his campaign and it was a major selling point. He himself never corrected that narrative until found out, nearly 4 years later. As a lawyer he well knows the concept of “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”. By omission he allowed a falsehood to become the story of his campaign. That does not speak well of his character.
So a reasonable person understanding the above would then start to examine other actions of Mr. Cruz with likely a more suspicious view. What has happened in the last three months:
1) There is the little issue of his sealed immigration records. Court decisions not withstanding, some are going to see this as deceptive.
2) the issue of the Iowa Carson pull-out sabotage. Some are going to assume this was deliberate and ruthless. There is some evidence to support that assertion, though I can see why folks would not believe that. But if you are already suspicious of the man, that action would tend to back up that suspicion.
3) Cruz’s fairly prolific miss-statements of Trumps declared stances. Some will justify these comments, to others it appears to be bearing false witness. If one finds in one’s conscious that these are lies, well it is hard not to look at Cruz in a negative light, even if you agree with him and feel he fought the good fight in Washington when virtually no one else did. Christians do not bear false witness and Cruz could have made his point without misrepresenting Trumps stated positions on numerous occasions.
4) Cruz’s apparent willingness to dump on Trump over the Chicago riot. That makes him appear to not be a defender of free speech, but an opportunist willing to go after his foe with any weapon at his disposal, at least to some I have talked to. Now that is problematic for one who is defined as a “principled conservative”, as that phrase implies a man who is internally restrained from actions that would violate right and wrong.
I could go on but if you are honest you will get the point: to some folks Cruz does not seem to be the trustworthy and principled conservative he said he was. While one can disagree with their conclusions, if you honestly examine the way they got to those opinions, I think you will see that thy have a point. It is not any single instance, but the slow accumulation of evidence if one is inclined to be suspicious in the first place.
The same way Cruz people who point out the many defects of Trump have a point. An honest Trump supporter will admit those faults, but respond with why they think he is the best candidate, those defects not withstanding.
I could go on for some time on the many faults of Trump, but you question seemed to be that you could not see how Trump supporters could see the 2012 funding issue as being damaging. Hopefully the answer provided helps you understand that, even if you do not agree with the conclusions.
Your personal attack while ignoring the facts that cannot support your agenda is so Alinsky.
Shocking how many freepers like you continue to believe & support a Bushie GOP-Establishment candidate.
Trump has exposed phonies like you.
You means like a shiny lure....that only once you eat it you realize it will kill you? That’s what worries me.
Yes. And on the flip side - if Trump wins the Repub nomination - we will vote for him against Hillary.
Trouble is - that strategy does not work. See 2008 and 20012 (McCain and Romney) as examples. The “hold your nose and vote” approach will guarantee Hillary a win next November.
>> Your personal attack while ignoring the facts that cannot support your agenda is so Alinsky.
Cruz in a Soviet uniform is a fact? Who knew? ROFL!
Seriously dude, that’s really tubular photoshop you got goin’! Mom will LOVE it!
Ben carson is a whiner and the only reason he is kissing up to trump is for a job.
fwiw
I liked Cruz* until he went negative and started ‘distorting the truth’**.
I was shocked at first, then aghast when he continued the behavior,
until I finally became disillusioned, disgusted and angry with him.
I can put up with a little of this from Trump
but from someone claiming to be a ‘principled conservative’ and Christian,
it is completely unacceptable.
*https://twitter.com/NSentinel1/status/676743481704992768
**https://www.facebook.com/tedcruzpage/videos/10153917713152464/
LOL...you’re doing it again!
You add to your collection of the Bible, the flag and the Constitution waving, with now the RULES.
It isn’t the present RNC Rules. It’s the Fraud. Fraudulent play is not even addressed in the rules.
The RNC Rules do not address “fixing” and theft. But, you knew that already.
Fixing is done on the road— known more as the road rules. Road rules are not addressed in the RULES book, either.
Character flaws cause theft, suppression, rejection and replacement, and fixing fights. It works, so long as you wave the Bible, the flag and the Constitution, and keep moving.
I can see you too are threatened by the people’s choice, smirking at the popular vote, as if it were but firewood to serve as kindling for fixing the race, stacking the delegates, winning nothing, but a reputation for fixing the fight.
How else can you win?
This is why your candidate is in the ditch with the people, along side the GOPEE.
TRUMP is not playing the “down low” as you describe it. He is exposing it. The people have seen it all now, loud and clear.
But RULES you say?
This has nothing to do with RULES. It’s simply “Fixing” the race.
I’m super serious!
The key is turnout not whether we like the candidate or not. Even though I’m not “wild” about any candidate I so dislike Hillary that I will vote simply to help cause her defeat. I think many people fell as I do.
Exactly! I am sick to death of lawyers running this country. It’s like they think they own the country.
The posts about Trump are worse. I have never seen so much hatred for a candidate. Cruz was my 2nd choice but I learned more about him and the posts on here really turned me off. Vote Trump.
_________________
familiar refrain...just look at the post on this thread. See which ones are nasty
Although I agree with you in theory...in practicality, Cruz has some good points. Notice that there has been no violence of this sort at other candidates' rallies. DT ran his rallies a bit like a WWE event early on. He wanted to be the tough guy... and it escalated. Is he responsible for MoveOn and BLM attacking his rally? No. But it's a selective reading of history to say that he didn't more or less challenge them to try.
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.