Posted on 12/16/2015 7:56:14 AM PST by VinL
Ted Cruz arrived in Las Vegas for Tuesday night's fifth Republican debate surging in the national polls and as the newly anointed favorite in Iowa, where support among evangelicals was always expected to be a strength. After the performance he turned in under the bright lights of this latest debate, he's likely to depart riding an even bigger wave of attention.
Cruz has always been one of the strongest and most experienced debaters on the stage, but he was even more aggressive on Tuesday than he has been in past debates. Instead of focusing his attention on criticizing the moderators as in previous performances, he used their questions to his advantage, embracing frontrunner Donald Trump early and attacking more mainstream rival Marco Rubio late.
Those two candidates had strong nights as well, Rubio, in particular, largely held serve in the establishment lane, but Cruz was the one who appeared to hit more of his marks and take fewer hits during the freewheeling and combative event.
One of Cruz's best moments came early in the night. For months, the Texas senator has been playing the long game with Trump, campaigning in the slipstream of his blustery belligerence on immigration and foreign policy in the hopes of eventually nabbing his supporters if he ultimately drops out. But on Tuesday (snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Cruz is still dicey on legalization and lost the debate here.
Ted Cruz on immigration: 'I do not intend to support legalization'
The pathological need to attack anyone, no matter what their conservative bona fides, who might threaten their icon is really flushing the ninnies out of the tall grass.
I don’t know, my friend, I suspect Cruz just wants to firmly put Rubio in the Gop-e camp, and I think Cruz did that (or, Rubio did it to himself).
Rubio is on video telling Fla voters he “would never support amnesty” -— imo, in this political climate, he can’t recover.
“I have never supported legalization, and I do not intend to support legalization,” the Texas senator said on the debate stage after rival Florida Sen. Marco Rubio encouraged the moderators to pose that question again to Cruz.
Rick Tyler, a campaign spokesman, confirmed that Cruz unequivocally now does not support a path to legalization.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/15/politics/ted-cruz-immigration-legalization/
Ted Cruz on immigration: ‘I do not intend to support legalization’
= = =
I think he is being internally honest. It is very hard to honestly promise ‘never’.
Also I think his debate speaking method includes word play, rhythm, a poetic style (probably subconsciously, maybe to his detriment). ‘I do not intend to’ vs. ‘I will never’ flows differently.
Cruz fought against the House's attempt at a legalization amnesty in early 2014. Go look it up.
Cruz's written plan is to fully enforce the law through deportations and removals.
Cruz last night said he was against a legalization.
Trump on July 24th 2015, when asked for the first time what he would do with the non criminals who are already here, said that he would try to work something out.
Appearing on MSNBC's "Morning Joe†Friday, host Joe Scarborough asked Trump what he would do about the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants living in the country once America secured its southern border. After arguing the real number of illegal immigrants is much higher and saying the first thing America needs to do is "take the bad" illegal immigrants and "get them the hell out," Trump sounded like he was open to providing some type of pathway to legalization for the remainder.
"And then the other ones -- and I'm a very big believer in merit system, I have to tell you," Trump said. "Because some of these people have been here, they've done a good job, you know, in some cases sadly they’ve been living under the shadows."
"We have to do something," he continued. "So whether it's merit or whether it's whatever, but I'm a believer in the merit system. If somebody's been outstanding, we try and work something out."
It wasn't until July 30th that Trump finally said that the non criminals should be deported, and even then he qualified his statement by saying that the good ones should be expedited back in, which is also a legalization amnesty. And he has said this a bunch of times.
Last night at the debate Trump did not say that we should expedite them back, which is an improvement.
Bump!
I can’t believe how much traction this “imagine controversy” is getting on FR!
It’s a solid unquestionable statement to say: I have never supported Hillary in the past, and I can’t IMAGINE supporting her in the future!”
It’s exactly the same as saying “There’s no way I’ll ever support Hillary”. It’s exactly the same. At least to those with a vocabulary over that of a second grader!
Unfortunately, no. And with respect to the rest, no one, except maybe Kasich and the kiddie table group will get out before the primaries, though they will continue to remain irrelevant in the conversation (except to call Trump unhinged).
Bump again.
Trump has said repeatedly (wrt the illegals already here): I’ll let the good ones back in.
1. If this isn’t “amnesty” I don’t know what is. It doesn’t do a lot of good to “deport them all” if you’re going to “let some back in”
2. Cruz hasn’t said anything CLOSE to “letting the good ones back in”.
I’ve had enough of this “Trump is better on the illegals problem” crap around here. If anything it’s the REVERSE.
I’ve said repeatedly I’ll say it again: I will hold my nose and vote for Trump in the general, and even support him in the primary if Cruz flames out for whatever reason, but at LEAST, on FR of all places, it should be Cruz FIRST, THEN Trump.
Again, I can’t believe here on FR we are not all behind Cruz! A year ago he was (deservedly) our DREAM candidate and now there’s this contingent who’s glommed onto Trump for, well I have no idea why (no charitable idea that is).
It’s time to stop it and wake up to reality. This isn’t a game show.
You forgot - Cruz is going to get Trump to pay for the Wall...
Seriously, my best outcome would be Trump President, Cruz Supreme Court...
I don’t intend to ever be arrested for speeding, either.
How hard is it to say “ I have never, nor will I ever support any kind of amnesty for illegal immigrants” Seems pretty simple to me, if you MEAN it.
Isn’t it a welcome change to have several GOPe types? Prevents the “party” from coalescing around one GOPe candidate becoming “inevitable”.
I think the race eventually comes down to Trump, Cruz and Rubio.
I’m giving it to Cruz and I think he’s the best candidate. Trump will just divide the GOP and ensure that Hillary is elected.
Cruz is an authentic conservative by anyone’s measure. Trump was a Hillary supporter and Democrat just a few years ago. Even now he attacks Cruz for doing nothing more than standing up to the GOP establishment. His economic policy is not based on a free market but rather on the idea that he will do a better job of running the economy from Washington. That’s what the Democrats have been saying for years and they’ve never been able to beat the market.
Cruz will definitely give us better judicial picks than any of the other candidates. His experience arguing in front of and clerking on the Supreme Court means that he will be as sharp as a tack when it comes to choosing judicial nominees. No more John Roberts or Justice Kennedys.
Compared to the job he’d have getting things on the right track, winning the Presidency is the easy part.
Amnesty for illegals. From Ted lips to your ears
Yes. I clearly heard Cruz say in the spring that legalization would not be fair to Americans or legal immigrants.
Post debate he said:
You follow the law. You do no have the option not to. When they are found and picked up you send them back.
I think about it this way:
Before Trump, the immigration argument was “Of course we should allow unlimited immigration. Should we do a path to citizenship now or later?”.
After Trump, the argument is “Build the wall, deport”.
Before Trump the muslim immigration question was “Admit someone unless specific reasons not to.”
After Trump, the muslim immigration question is “Admit no one unless specific reasons to do so.
In both of those arguments he changed the frame of the debate. No one else was able to accomplish that. Not the Senators with their superior debate skills, not the Governors with their years of experience leading governments. Not the other outsiders. Just Trump.
That’s why he’s a LEADER. He may not always be right, he may say stuff that makes you scratch your head but he LEADS. It’s a quality we’ve been lacking for a while.
Cruz supports “legal status” (amnesty) for illegals. Rubeo is right about Cruz, but Cruz is a master wordsmith so no one can nail him down on the issue of legalization. That he refuses to tell us where he stands on this most important issue is all I need to know. Go Trump.
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.