Posted on 04/20/2015 10:51:54 AM PDT by VinL
The first time I met Ted Cruz, he argued with me. The second time I met Ted Cruz, he argued with me. It wasn’t personal, of course. Ted Cruz simply loves to argue.
Those two incidents told me a lot about Cruz. The first time was at an event in Florida in February 2012, months before he won the Texas GOP Senate nomination. I had never met him, but he wandered up to me and started complaining about my assessment of the Republican primary in the Lone Star State.
I told him to come to my office for an interview and to discuss the race, and he did a few weeks later.
I had no idea if the tea party favorite would win the GOP nomination, but I knew I wanted to learn about his views, his upbringing, his education and professional background. He wouldn’t have any of that. He was there to prosecute his case, insisting he would defeat the early favorite in the race, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. And he did.
There is no self-doubt in the junior senator from Texas, who has an impressive résumé and has already entered the race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.
Cruz has an undergraduate degree from Princeton and a law degree from Harvard. He clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist, served in the President George W. Bush Justice Department and as solicitor general of Texas, all before the 2012 victory when he knocked off the state’s sitting lieutenant governor in the Republican primary.
The Texan is one of the more combative and confrontational conservatives in the race for his party’s nomination. That has made him a favorite on the right and a punching bag to liberals and many in the national media.
Unlike some other hopefuls in the contest, Cruz regards caution and compromise as a violation of principle. He has encouraged House Republicans to take on their more pragmatic legislative leaders, earning him a reputation as one of the leaders of the GOP’s tea party wing.
Cruz’s positions on hot-button issues — from immigration and Common Core to taxes, spending, abortion and national defense — resonate well with the Republican base, but it is his take-no-prisoners style and willingness to combat Democrats and the entire liberal establishment that make him such a favorite among those conservatives who are watching government get bigger.
The freshman senator is one of a handful of Republican presidential hopefuls — along with Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and Ben Carson — competing for evangelical and tea party conservatives in the Iowa caucuses. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul is also a significant problem for Cruz, since Paul has considerable appeal among anti-establishment conservatives.
The importance of the many evangelical conservatives in Iowa, the first test in the nominating process, should not be underestimated.
The 2012 Iowa entrance poll conducted by Edison Research for multiple media clients showed 57 percent of caucus attendees called themselves “born again” or evangelical Christians, and just shy of two-thirds (64 percent) of respondents said they supported the tea party.
New Hampshire GOP primary voters (a group that includes a large number of independents) aren’t nearly as religious or conservative as Iowans who will go to the caucuses, but South Carolina Republican primary voters are. In 2012, 65 percent of those who voted in the Palmetto State Republican primary self-identified as born again or evangelical Christians and 64 percent said they supported the tea party.
Obviously, if a single Republican hopeful can emerge as the consensus candidate of the evangelical and tea party faction, that candidate would be a factor well into the nominating process.
The recent national debate over religious freedom and gay rights is likely to elevate cultural issues for evangelical social conservatives, giving Cruz and his competitors another talking point to woo caucus-goers and boost evangelical participation.
But while Cruz is likely to engender passion among his supporters, he is regarded by many others in his party as unappealing and, even worse, unacceptable. To his critics, he is a self-promoting snake oil salesman, an unflattering comparison that suggests he is both untrustworthy and unscrupulous.
They find his language too inflammatory and confrontational, and many regard him as a disastrous general election nominee who would not only lose the presidential election but damage the party’s prospects down-ballot.
The kind of Republicans who supported Mitt Romney and John McCain in the past will never embrace Cruz, of course. But it isn’t clear that the Texas senator can attract much more than the hardcore tea party and movement conservative crowd, which, while an important segment of the GOP, isn’t large enough to select the party’s presidential nominee.
So while Cruz is an interesting candidate and certainly could play a role in the unfolding GOP race, he probably needs to broaden his message and change his style to win his party’s nomination. And given what I know of the Texas senator, that’s not happening
Mr. Rothenbreg begins his article by recounting how Sen. Cruz told Rothenberg that he had the wrong analysis in concluding that Cruz would lose to Dewhurst.--
Here, Mr. Rothenberg persists in his error.
Of course, Democrats have Candy Crowley to help them argue.
“It wasn’t personal, of course. Ted Cruz simply loves to argue. “
In other words Ted Cruz would fit right in here at FR.
Argue?
No, “Educate”.
Not accept false premises.
Ted Cruz would fit right in here at FR.
It isn’t “arguing” when you’re right.
Sounds like Stu Rothenberg likes to argue against reality.
> “That has made him a favorite on the right and ***a punching bag*** to liberals and many in the national media.”
Liberals would never dare go up against Cruz unless they are in front of a ‘punching bag’ while fantasizing they are punching Ted Cruz.
Argue? What, does the guy have control over his own mind or something?
That needs to be investigated, hope the NSA is on this.
He’s likely just floating out the latest fabricated characterization of Cruz, hoping against hope that he can deter a Cruz presidency.
Look how Ted Cruz mops the floor with Candy Crowley:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxPnjgU1Q68
I shudder to watch what Ted Cruz does to any leftist media pundit, like Godzilla stepping on a cockroach.
He says Cruz has no self doubt...
Everyone has self doubt, the question is
what do you do with it?
Do you let it dictate you or do you
convert it into belief and action?
Patton always said “Never take counsel of your fears...”
Ted has them but doesn’t let them lead him from his
goal.
Right, Mr. Rothenburg! YOU give orders to Ted Cruz... and HE follows them.
Liberals love to argue...but the author doesn’t seem to have a problem with that.
I guess liberals aren’t used to republicans arguing back.
Stu Rothenberg likes his butt kissed.
“But while Cruz is likely to engender passion among his supporters, he is regarded by many others in his party as unappealing and, even worse, unacceptable. To his critics, he is a self-promoting snake oil salesman, an unflattering comparison that suggests he is both untrustworthy and unscrupulous.
They find his language too inflammatory and confrontational, and many regard him as a disastrous general election nominee who would not only lose the presidential election but damage the party’s prospects down-ballot.
The kind of Republicans who supported Mitt Romney and John McCain in the past will never embrace Cruz, of course.”
**************
That’s because they are gonad-free wusses who just want to go with the flow.
Exactly!
He's only a "punching bag" for those liberals too afraid to confront him face-to-face. No liberal in the country could match Cruz' knowledge and message delivery.
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.
