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.
>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.
And no other candidate has had paid Soros protestors shutdown freeways to stop people from attending his rallies. The left causes violence at events for people they fear and they ignore Ted Cruz because he isn’t a threat.
And There’s still violence at Trump rallies. The only thing that’s changed is Trump asking people not to fight back so the media’s stopped reporting on it. Trump supporters are still regularly spit on, hit, robbed and assaulted by paid Soros protestors.
So why are you and Ted Cruz coming to Soro’s and BLM’s defense using the leftist media’s lying narrative? Why not take the high road and defends Trump’s right to have rally’s without violent leftists assaulting his supporters? Or are your principles entirely situation?
As I said, Cruz had every chance to size the high ground and probably the primary but he’s not a principled sort of guy.