Posted on 12/10/2015 7:49:24 AM PST by RoosterRedux
Senator Ted Cruz raised questions on Wednesday at a private fund-raiser about whether Donald J. Trump, his bombastic rival for the Republican presidential nomination, has the "judgment" to be president and mused about "strength," according to two people who attended the event in Manhattan
The remarks from Mr. Cruz came as he has studiously avoided public criticism of Mr. Trump, who is handily beating the rest of the Republican field in opinion polls.
Mr. Cruz has positioned himself to be the beneficiary of any erosion of support for Mr. Trump. While he has said he doesn't agree with Mr. Trump's proposal for a ban on Muslim immigrants entering the United States, he has taken pains to praise Mr. Trump for making immigration a focal point of his candidacy.
But inside a conference room in a Madison Avenue office, with about 70 people pressed around a table, Mr. Cruz gave a candid assessment of the race, lumping Mr. Trump with another candidate whose supporters the Texas senator hopes to poach, Ben Carson, according to two people present for the remarks.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
And they have the nerve to claim that Donald Trump is helping Hillary.
You’re not allowed to note weird things Trump says. Believers in Trump will not accept facts or quotes.
“This smells to me like the Times is trying to manufacture a wedge between Cruz and Trump.”
Yeah. I’m taking this with a block of salt and want FULL context.
Right now I’m willing to vote for Cruz in the general. The roots are not very deep, however.
I think Ted senses (like everyone else did before him) that it’s slipping away. We’re now 50 days out, and in most polls he’s 20 points behind. In normal politics, that’s just insurmountable.
Ouch.
Some can’t handle that truth.
But he has expressed openness to even have people like Christie in his cabinet, so this is just (I think) normal politics for Trump.
lol, also been zero chance of trump/cruz.
from article:
He went on: âWho am I comfortable having their finger on the button? Now thatâs a question of strength, but itâs also a question of judgment. And I think that is a question that is a challenging question for both of them.â
Don’t think that won’t make great ads against Trump.
NY Times trying to stir the pot. No news here.
Sound dubious to me.
If it is in relation to Trump's plan to temporarily halt all Islamic entry into the US...let's put that one to rest.
What is the truth of the matter? Is Trump's proposal illegal? Is his proposal un-Constitutional? Is his proposal un-American?
Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
This is in the U.S. Code of Laws. It was passed by Congress in 1952 and has been the law of the land ever since. And, by the way, at the time it was passed by a Democratic Congress.
So, to be clear, if the President determines that murders/killers/enemies are infiltrating any group of people to do harm to America, he has been given the power by Congress to stop or restrict that groups immigration or non-immigration status and ability to come into the country. This is precisely what Trump has proposedâ¦and for obvious reasons.
It is NOT un-American, it is U.S. Law.
It is NOT un-Constitutional, Article 6 Paragraph 3 of the U.S. Constitution regarding no religious test refers specifically and only to the election of Congress...not to immigration.
As President, Donald Trump would have full legal authority under U.S. Law to do exactly what he has proposed.
All of the hype, outrage, and statements to the contrary are either political grandstanding, abject ignorance of the law, or willful lies regarding the issue.
You really need to hear the verbal wording and how it was said. It maybe that these two
came away with a different opinion of what was said or they could be accurate. IMO, if
accurate others would be talking about it. We’ll see.
This is the NYT’s feeble attempt to get the only candidate, who didn’t speak up against Trump for the muzzie comments, sound like he’s against Trump. Again, feeble attempt! Like someone else said, hearsay.
Well it is New York Times. Hope it’s wrong for all our sakes.
Cruz better hope that there is no recording of the remarks. If so, the Trump guns will train on Cruz and his numbers will plummet.
I don’t think that is an endorsement Trump was looking to gain...
Even if Senator Cruz said it just that way, it makes no difference. Sooner or later the front runners will have to define the differences between them.
I do believe when the times comes, it will not be school yard ugly.
Trump has a lifetime of real achievements, many of which bear his name.
Biden is a lifelong politician who has accomplished nothing.
As far as a cult, why would you say that, especially about many of your fellow Freepers?
Trump is leading the elites and DC insiders around by the nose--so if I agree with that, I am a cultist?
If Cruz chooses this of all moments to crack down on Trump, he’s making a serious mistake!
On this same day, some in the senate are attempting to sneak in a muslim-protection clause to an unrelated piece of legislation. No time for deliberation — the vote today:
Congress to Consider Easing Passage into U.S. for Immigrants
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3370750/posts
[Some in congress attempting a blitz due to âoutrageâ over Trump. God help us!]
Cruz answering question from reporter on this issue after his live Heritage speech right now-
Paraphrased response
“We had frank discussions about threats in the region...talked about immediate developments, Iran, Syria, radical Islamic terror...The course of a Presidential election voters will make a decision, who has the right judgement...everyone of us is being assessed by that metric”
“According to many Cruz supporters, here, Cruz would NEVER even consider a VP slot, under Trump. Why choose a running mate whose base is completely against you?...”
******************************************************************************
You are sadly mistaken if you think Cruz’ “base” is “completely against” Trump. The great bulk of Cruz supporters on FR think a Cruz/Trump or a Trump/Cruz ticket would be ideal.
In any case, IMHO, it is imperative that Cruz and Trump continue their de facto alliance in order to obtain the COMBINED number of delegates needed to make up a majority of delegates at the national convention. This will ensure that the GOPe will be helpless to employ trickery to determine the nominee. And, possibly at least as important as determining the ticket, that combined majority of constitutional conservative delegates would also be able to take over the national Republican Party apparatus. Wouldn’t that be a dream come true?
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.