Posted on 11/13/2015 11:18:05 AM PST by Isara
Rich wrote an excellent piece on Ted Cruz this morning, on why the Texas senator, in the face of bombproof organization, policy chops, and top debate performances, can't seem to generate media buzz. As Rich notes: "The Atlantic tracks candidate mentions on cable TV. In the past 100 days, Cruz ranks ninth among all presidential candidates from both parties, well behind Chris Christie and just above Kasich, both of whom are throwing Hail Marys for the nomination."
I agree with Rich. Ted Cruz gets no respect. But here's why that's a good thing.
Right now, in terms of coverage, the media's preferred GOP lineup - Trump, Carson, Rubio, and Bush - are in the throes of internecine strife. Maybe not intentionally. But media outlets like to pit front-runners against one another, and they do it well. I remember a month or so ago when Jeb Bush, on Morning Joe, criticized Rubio for his youth and inexperience, comparing his campaign to Barack Obama's back in 2008. Hope and change, and all that.
Talk about sparking the wires! I can't think of a single political reporter (including yours truly) who didn't pounce on that moment. It's the perfect drama: the mentor and his protege, a long-simmering feud at last breaking into the public square. The online ecosystem has followed the story obsessively since.
And then, of course, there's Trump and Carson. The media's not orchestrating that one so much as it's been handed to them on a platter. Take yesterday in Iowa: when Trump should have been touting his candidacy in forward-looking terms, he wasted all of his oxygen on Carson. "How stupid are the people of Iowa...to believe this crap?" he ranted. It was media gold. If you don't believe me, just take a few moments to scroll through Twitter.
Anyways, my point: you're not seeing this obsessive coverage of Cruz, because his campaign isn't tethered to that sort of narrative. (At least not yet.) And that's not an accident: From day one, Cruz has been playing the long game, and it's starting to pay off. He's gone through the majority of this primary season unscathed, playing nice with others, hanging back until he finds his window. He's letting others pick the fights, a strategy demonstrated pointedly during Tuesday's debate. As Rubio and Rand Paul fought it out over defense spending, the camera suddenly panned to Cruz. Maybe we'd have more money for defense spending, he said with a feigned casualness, if we'd get rid of, oh, I don't know, corporate welfare like sugar subsidies.
It was a direct jab at Rubio, albeit it unnamed. Cruz knows he's catching on with voters, and he's provoking his challengers accordingly. Subtly, but just enough to catch fire.
Rubio knows this, and he's now centering his line of attack on Cruz's immigration stance. For Rubio, who's stayed mum on immigration for most of this primary - Gang of Eight, and all that - it's a gutsy move.
But Rubio is doing exactly what other candidates - and what the media - will soon realize is vital. Finding Cruz's weak spots, taking real notice of the candidate who could upend every narrative we've become accustomed to this cycle. And that's harder to do when caucuses loom nearer and nearer.
Is that disrespect? Maybe. But it's exactly the kind that Cruz has preferred all along.
Please click on the pictures at the top of the columns for more details on the ratings of the candidates.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Budget, Spending & Debt |  |
|
 |
|
|
| Civil Liberties |  |
|
|
|
|
| Education | |
|
|
|
|
| Energy & Environment | |
|
|
|
|
| Foreign Policy & Defense | |
|
|
|
|
| Free Market | |
|
|
|
|
| Health Care & Entitlements | |
|
|
|
|
| Immigration | |
|
|
|
|
| Moral Issues | |
|
|
|
|
| Second Amendment | |
|
|
|
|
| Taxes, Economy & Trade | |
|
|
|
|
More at Conservative Review: https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates
Note: If you don't like the ratings for any reason, please contact Conservative Review's Editor-in-Chief, "The Great One," Mark Levin. But I have to warn you that you may get this response from him: "GET OFF THE PHONE, YOU BIG DOPE!"
Ted’s doing pretty well for the man who must not be named.
Right now Cruz has one of the most foundationally strong campaigns of any outside of Trump and Carson. Rubio is very dependent on getting Jeb’s big money to come to him where as Cruz has a legion of small money supporters that are unwavering.
What I’m interested in is how Trump’s big mistake of attacking Carson in what is a very low way is going to play out. I expect Trump support in Iowa to suffer a lot from his miscalculation.
LOL @ “product placement”!
Some folks have different definitions
than others of skyrocketing, I guess.
....in the face of bombproof organization, policy chops, and top debate performances, can’t seem to generate media buzz.
Sorry. I was being critical of the headline, not you.
| Poll | Date |
Trump
|
Carson
|
Rubio
|
Cruz
|
Bush
|
Paul
|
Kasich
|
Fiorina
|
Huckabee
|
Christie
|
Jindal
|
Santorum
|
Pataki
|
Graham
|
Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RCP Average | 10/24 - 11/4 | 24.8 | 24.4 | 11.8 | 9.6 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 2.2 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.0 | Trump +0.4 |
| McClatchy/MaristMcClatchy | 10/29 - 11/4 | 23 | 24 | 12 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Carson +1 |
| FOX NewsFOX News | 11/1 - 11/3 | 26 | 23 | 11 | 11 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Trump +3 |
| QuinnipiacQuinnipiac | 10/29 - 11/2 | 24 | 23 | 14 | 13 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Trump +1 |
| NBC/WSJNBC/WSJ | 10/25 - 10/29 | 23 | 29 | 11 | 10 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | -- | -- | -- | -- | Carson +6 |
| IBD/TIPPIBD/TIPP | 10/24 - 10/29 | 28 | 23 | 11 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Trump +5 |
Yup. MSM paid-for polls continue to show that Ted Cruz doesn't have support.
Gosh, what's not to trust about Reuters?
Compare the NH filing events for Cruz and Trump;
Trump; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mOxWDBIAwk
Cruz; https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/664907296523202560?s=09
There should be no doubt from those two videos who in the best position to win the nomination let alone who is in the best position to beat Hillary.
In order to fix the things that need to be fixed the republican candidate has to be able to beat Hillary. That first win (beating Hillary) is required for there to be a chance at the second win (fixing what needs to be fixed). If there isn’t a first “win” (against Hillary) there will be no “win-win”.
Cruz will not beat Hillary head to head, Trump is the only candidate currently running able to do that. The movement that Trump has generated at his rallies has proved that beyond all doubt.
Yes, what's not to like and trust about MSM polls telling me that Cruz can't win.
BTW, wasn't there a recent poll that had Cruz beating Hillary?
What difference does it make?
People hear the polls they want to hear
and disregard the rest. I can’t see Reuters
as having an untoward interest in who wins
the primary, but paranoia runs deep.
The Trump supporters are heavy on here Trumpeting a Rueters poll as we speak having Trump gaining once again in the polls.
The consensus of the polls showing the republican candidates head-to-head against Hillary consistently favors Trump.
No way around it. So to achieve any win with republican policies we must first achieve a win against Hillary. I’m sorry but Cruz won’t deliver a win against Hillary. And I like Cruz, more than Trump.
No candidate in the race, except maybe Sanders, has the vast silent majority movement consistently showing up at their rallies. You don’t have to look at poll numbers to see that. That silent majority movement proves Trump is the only republican candidate that has a viable chance at beating Hillary.
See post 12.
I say that as someone who bought Cruz’s book, and likes and supports Cruz as much or more than Trump.
Go, Cruz, GO!
No one is saying that Cruz doesn’t have support. The truth of the mater is that Trump has way more support than Cruz. Cruz could win with the support of Trump as his VP - but not without the silent majority that is consistently coming out for Trump’s rallies. see post 12.
Trump's Record on Free-market Issue: (from the Conservative Review)
Trump has a terrible record on free market issues. The only bright spot is the Federal Reserve's quantitative easing, but this glimmer is countermanded by his repeated support for bailing out Wall Street and the auto industry, and increased stimulus spending. Of particular concern is Trump's belief that the government can use eminent domain powers to seize private property in the name of private economic development. This comes as no surprise, given his support for using eminent domain to profit his own company.
Trump supported the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of London, allowing public authorities to seize private land for economic development by private investors; Trump said, “I happen to agree with [the decision] 100 percent.” (National Review) This is no surprise given Trump’s attempt to use eminent domain in his own line of work. (Institute for Justice)
Trump supported President Obama’s 2009 stimulus, saying: “The word stimulus is probably not used in its fullest…you know, certain of the things that were given weren't really stimulus. They were pork, as we call it, or they were gifts to certain people. But overall, I think he's [President Obama] doing very well. You do need stimulus and you do have to keep the banks alive.” (CNN)
Trump supported TARP, saying, "You had to do something to shore up the banks, because ... you would have had a run on every bank." (CNN)
Trump supported the 2008 auto bailout, saying, “I think the government should stand behind them 100 percent. You cannot lose the auto companies. They’re great. They make wonderful products.” He also said that the federal government could “easily save the companies.” (Daily Caller)
Trump criticized the Federal Reserve’s intervention in the debt market, saying quantitative easing creates “phony numbers” that mislead the marketplace and “will not ultimately benefit the economy. The dollar will go down in value and inflation will start rearing its ugly head.” (CNBC)
Donald Trump has a history of using eminent domain to complete business deals. Multiple times Trump has supported the use of government agencies to take possession of homes and businesses for use in his private business plans. Eminent domain seizures are reserved only for public use of property rather than abuse by the government taking property from one individual and giving to another. (Washington Post)
Donald Trump has sought and received crony capitalist tax breaks for his commercial properties in New York. These tax breaks, and even an abatement, force the property taxes of other property owners to rise at the expense of the connected. Special treatment for one business or industry over another with the tax code conflicts with free market principles. (National Review)
In 2009, Trump supported Barack Obama's call for limits on the pay of executives. (CNN)
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.