Ted Cruz is ‘not the establishment but doesn’t need on-the-job training’

Soshable ^ | Nov 27, 2015 | JD Rucker

[Calpublican]

He ran a brilliant campaign against all odds to win the Senate seat. He is running a brilliant presidential campaign and has the most organized ground game.

[Logical me]

Trump is the only real solid answer we have. And this highly successful man will select the advisers that will be the foremost real experienced in correcting America. One thing I fully realize that Trump would have never been the success unless he hired competent businessman and used their talent. Is that what we need? Damn right. No man is an island unto his own and made anything of himself.

[impimp]

i DON’T WANT HIM TO UNIFY. i WANT HIM TO BE STRONG LIKE A MAGNET - ATTRACTING THOSE WHO ARE TO THE RIGHT TO HIS BRAND OF CONSERVATISM. i DON’T WANT SOMEBODY TO REACH ACROSS THE AISLE (OR EVEN REACH OUT TO rEPUBLICANS) IN ORDER TO PASS LEGISLATION.

[gwgn02]

Trump will make a great head of Dept of Commerce in a Cruz presidency.

[Calpublican]

I believe the majority of our presidents have been lawyers. Most, like Cruz, had to run extraordinary campaigns to win office. His Senate campaign, winning against all odds, was brilliant.

[Isara]

I used to use that talking point too. He was a government lawyer is a pretty weak answer to the never running anything charge. Ted has never ran anything big like a successful company or state. He needs training.

In case you missed it, during private practice at Morgan Lewis, Ted Cruz built their appellate practice to be one of the top 20 law firms on National Law Journal's "Appellate Hot List" in 2010.

[jpsb]

He can thank Sarah Palin for that. Sarah Palin came to Texas and campaigned for Cruz. I for one changed my vote to Cruz because of that.

[Isara]

Trump is the only real solid answer we have.

Trump supported TARP, auto bailout and Porkulus bill, i.e., Trump is for big government and big businesses.

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)

[conservative98]

leaders aren’t unifiers. They lead.

They also unify. The fact remains that Reagan was a unifier. There was a substantial faction of Reagan Democrats in 1980 and 1984; I have seen no Cruz Democrats. Trump is like Reagan in being a unifier and will unite Americans.

[KGeorge]

I’m sorry? The community organizer we’ve had for the last seven years has everyone divided into factions & (in some cases, literally) killing each other.

[FreeReign]

Ted has spend almost his entire life in government as a lawyer, the last two years as a senator. He has zero experience as an executive. He has never had to meet a payroll. He will require a lot of on the job training.

Trump NEVER cites the Constitution and principles of liberty.

[FreeReign]

He can thank Sarah Palin for that. Sarah Palin came to Texas and campaigned for Cruz. I for one changed my vote to Cruz because of that.

Wait...you were going to vote for the uber RINO Dewhurst?

[itsahoot]

Trump/Cruz is my ideal ticket.

Cruz just said over at CNN that the race will ultimately be between him and Rubio. Predicting I guess that Trump will not make the cut, so no more Trump/Cruz threads here ok.

[jstaff]

In the last two presidential elections the voice on FR has been somewhat united in the view that we need to put up a truly conservative candidate and stop having to choose the lesser of two evils. This year we have a truly conservative candidate with proven credentials, Sen Ted Cruz, whom I support whole heartedly.

It seems, however, that he just won’t do because he is not a rich businessman who has made a life buying political influence for his personal profit. Ted Cruz is being rejected on FR, the premier conservative gathering place, for not being a Wall Street profiteer. at the same he gets panned because his wife works for a large bank.

I just wonder what some people really want. Reagan is not coming back, and I don’t think he would be universally welcomed on FR if he did. Cruz is the answer, not Trump.

[jpsb]

I was undecided, Dan Patrick whom I respect, was all in for Dewhurst so I was leaning Dewhurst. Sarah whom I greatly respect convinced me to vote Cruz. Prior to Sarah the race looked like a lesser of two evils race.

[CatherineofAragon]

"Of the three, only Cruz has the proper conservative plan that can actually become a reality."

Correct.

[CatherineofAragon]

"He needs lots of training. Ted has never ran anything and is not a unifier."

Yeah, we need some more of that reach-across-the-aisle stuff. /S

[CatherineofAragon]

And you are already on record stating that you don’t care about social issues, so you would never support Cruz, regardless.

[HiTech RedNeck]

MEOW

[FourPeas]

The difference between him and the other two anti-establishment candidates is that Cruz knows the game and plays it very well for the sake of the country even if it means making enemies along the way.

Cruz has demonstrated this time after time whether it's in the Senate, at the FTC, or arguing before SCOTUS. Cruz knows how the system works and how to work within it.