Why don't you read the article sport? Oh wait reading financial statements is way over your head.
Posted on 12/28/2015 2:33:48 PM PST by Isara
Read these two quotes carefully: The first: “Cruz cannot win because the Washington elites despise him.” The second goes: “[T]here are a lot of good candidates – I like nearly all of them… …except Cruz.” Which one of the similar quotes is from a pro-Cruz Super PAC and which is from a former Republican nominee for president?
The first quote is from an ad from Keep the Promise I, a Cruz Super PAC. The second is from Bob Dole, the 1996 Republican nominee and war hero, who got trounced by Bill Clinton. Both purport to highlight a negative of Senator Cruz, but do they really?
The answer is hidden in an examination of the conservative insurgency in Massachusetts, of all places. Five years ago this very week, things were starting to turn around for then-State Senator Scott Brown (R–MA).
Knowing how much of a train wreck RomneyCare had become, the voters of Massachusetts were drawn to Brown’s singular campaign message: “I will be the 41st vote to stop Obamacare.” Attorney General Martha Coakley’s team misread the electorate and put out ads that in effect said, “If you elect Scott Brown you will stop the president from giving healthcare to millions of Americans.” Two different candidates, same message, and we all know who won that race.
That same dynamic is playing out in the presidential race this year; be it with Donald Trump or Ted Cruz. The establishment keeps telling the voters how awful these two candidates are, but that just makes the voters gravitate to them even more.
Nowhere is this playing out more clearly than in Iowa where a series of establishment allies are swinging hard at Cruz in advertisements and mailers. All of this comes as Cruz further cements his lead in the state. On Christmas, CNN reported that a collection of five independent groups, aligned with the establishment and Mike Huckabee have begun attacks on Cruz in Iowa.
The attacks are being spearheaded by two people with ties to the establishment: Nick Ryan, who is an establishment activist in Iowa, and Sean Noble, another establishment hack who is backing Rubio. Mark Levin wrote of Noble’s Alinsky-like tactics back in November. Regarding Noble’s attacks on Cruz’s vote for the America Freedom Act, Conservative Review’s own Daniel Horowitz said: “Mr. Noble worked for Sen. Jeff Flake who also voted for the Freedom Act. I guess his boss and all of Rubio’s backers are also weak on national security.” Noble boasts, on his own website, of his ties to the “elite” of the party. He says “…or nearly 20 years, a pretty elite cast of characters has been doing just that [paying attention to Noble].”
Ryan is a longstanding force in Iowa politics, allied with the moderate Governor Branstad. On his website, Ryan describes himself as having investments in renewable energy—i.e. ethanol—in Iowa. Ted Cruz is very much against ethanol mandates.
When you scratch under the hood of the attacks on Cruz, and ask why they are more pointed than the attacks on Trump, a common theme begins to emerge. That is self-interest. It can be as plain as someone who has financial stakes in ethanol running ads against an anti-ethanol candidate, or it can be more complex, like with Noble—someone trying to hold onto the power they’ve carved out in the political industrial complex. Therein lies the real truth of why the attacks are stronger against Cruz than Trump, even though they really aren’t working against either candidate.
Trump is a dealmaker running a campaign as a disrupter to the status quo. Cruz is a proven disrupter to the status quo. That is a very big difference indeed.
The political industrial complex believes deep down that they can negotiate with the author of The Art of the Deal; they know they will lose the levers of power with Ted Cruz. You can see it in the voracity and frequency of their attacks.
The establishment consultants and chattering class know they have the most to lose with a Cruz presidency. What do they lose with a Cruz presidency? The very levers of power by which they enrich themselves: the Republican Party apparatus.
It goes much deeper than Cruz holding the reins of the executive branch. With a President Cruz, the positions of the self-described elite within the GOP power structure are in jeopardy. As much as the establishment screams electability from the rooftops, deep down they know that Cruz can and will win in 2016 if nominated. That is an existential threat to business as usual and the ruling class itself.
Rule #1 of the political industrial complex is: maintain power at all cost, even if it means torpedoing an electable conservative like Cruz. Here is how it would play out badly for them were Cruz the nominee:
Cruz is the larger threat to establishment because, if he wins, they lose all the levers of power. McConnell and his allies would be tossed out of organizations such as the Republican National Committee, National Republican Senatorial Committee, National Republican Congressional Committee, etc... If history is any guide, the sitting president of a political party has a large leeway in choosing those in key power positions. That puts the earning potential and power of the current political industrial complex in complete jeopardy.
That is why, come January, the establishment will continue to turn all their guns on Cruz because they would rather Trump win the nomination and lose to Hillary than for Ted Cruz to have a chance of being president. If that happened they would attempt to blame a Trump loss on the Tea Party, and keep their cushy jobs. As Cruz inevitably gains on Trump, the establishment will go after Cruz 110%, even if they are currently waging a rhetorical war on Trump.
As the calendar turns to 2016, and the political industrial complex realizes they can’t field a winning candidate on their own, they will increasingly turn their fire on Cruz over Trump. When they do so, be very aware that it isn’t for the “good of the country” or even because of “electability.” It pretty much boils down to what they have to do to keep food on their tables and their pockets lined.
A very powerful motivator indeed.
It has only struck me in the past day or two how profound it is that the only reason Trump is famous at all is because he set about becoming famous, methodically, in a field where the vast majority are unknown names. The only reason Trump is famous is because he self-promoted himself into celebrity status -- it's like he was thinking, "What's the point of being a billionaire if you're not famous?"
“Old News. TRUMP has already plead “GUILTY AS CHARGEDâ€.”
Well if Trump’s past is not allowed to be debated then you really shouldn’t criticize anything that Cruz has done in the past. You sound very much like an Obamabot claiming Trump’s past is off limits.
Yes, many young people have changed their views, but Trump changed his views from 2012 until last year, coincidentally the same time that he started venturing into politics. That generally raises a red flag because it is the definition of pandering.
It isn’t a revolution, it just shows how dumbed down our society has gotten thanks to reality tv.
If Trump becomes the candidate, I will be on the live thread with you during the first Trump/Clinton debate to see how it goes. :o)
Cruz did NOT campaign for TPA.
So what’s that article he wrote with Paul Ryan doing? What about the interviews he did on the subject, downplaying the danger of TPP on immigration law and poo pooing conservative concerns as internet conspiracy theories?
Interesting to see Team Cruz already air brushing history. Indeed Cruz vigorously campaigned for several weeks to enable Obama’s TPA. Then voted for it and instructed his staff to lie to us for weeks about it. Then once the bill was assured safe passage he withdrew his support hours before the final vote.
I was solidly in the Cruz camp until his TPA betrayal. After that, I reviewed Cruz again and came to realize that it is impossible to tell with him what is genuine conservatism and what is beltway theater hot air. Therefore, I withdrew my support.
$9.5 Billion in revenue is $9.5 Billion in revenue. It's not profits. It's not assets. And it's certainly not $9.5 Billion in net worth. Get it?
According to Sessions the Gang of Eight immigration bill wouldn’t have been stopped without him. Cruz fought the budget battle almost singlehandedly, shutting down the government and giving the Senate to the Republicans.
The Gang of 8 bill passed the Senate 68-32. Cruz didn’t stop anything. As always.
“You mean the Congress that has steamrolled Cruz and made him the beltway establishment doormat? “
I never said that I liked Congress, but that still does not give the president dictatorial rights. If we want to change congress then we either vote them out or have a new Constitutional convention, but either way, the President is not a king and should not be able to unilaterally make laws. If you think otherwise, then you are a progressive communist.
“It’s very generous and progressive of you to give it to them”
I didn’t give those rights...the Constitution did. Why don’t you see how far you get with the argument that Trump can ban all black immigration since blacks account for a majority of all major crime. Somehow, I doubt you will get very far with that since that too would be illegal.
I’m not saying I wouldn’t vote for him if he’s the nominee. Though there’s yet some distance to traverse to that point.
“I was solidly in the Cruz camp until his TPA betrayal”
I call B.S. on your statement. If you were unhappy about one issue with Cruz then you would not run to Trump since Trump is pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, and pro-assault gun ban. That would be like you running from Reagan and supporting Bernie Sanders because you didn’t like Reagan stance on space weapons. It just doesn’t make a lick of sense.
You continuously deflect from Trump’s liberal positions in a attempt to distort Cruz’s record.
Sorry, the President can ban any person or group if he deems them unfit or dangerous to our country. He has that power.
... in ANNUAL revenue is so much money that Forbes assertions about a private company's worth is silly.
He can ban any person or group based on certain criteria. He can’t do it based on race/color or religion. The courts will shut him down over it.
Refresh me. I don’t believe I said much, if anything at all, against Cruz’ past.
I said to another poster that I read where he ducked out after the 20 hour filibuster, and joined up with the NRSC, went silent and got himself hamstrung against supporting any conservative in a contest anywhere, and never uttered a dang word in opposition to the NRSC gifting the Barbour boys, in MS, to engage in the outrageous “Mississippi Treatment”, against the conservative leading in that race, and got THAD COCHRAN re-elected. The mole of the senate, over a staunch conservative.
That is actually the worst I said against Senator Cruz.
Next?
Your point?
I didn’t say that you did specifically. I was talking in general terms. Our debate began when I pointed out to another poster that Trump supported liberal policies for over 30 years (and still does) after that poster accused Cruz of waffling on one particular issue in Cruz’s past. You then interjected and called me a liar. So I merely provided the proof to show that Trump is still a liberal.
What scares me most is that Trump is for banning “assault” weapons and instituting a waiting period on rifles and shotguns in addition to handguns, while also expanding background checks. That is Trump’s current position; not a past position so it is still relevant to the election.
Let me try again: $9.5 Billion in annual or any revenue is NOT $9.5 Billion is assets or $9.5 Billion in net worth for Trump or anyone else.
Now If you follow the link I have you twice already, you’ll find out exactly how Forbes very painstakingly arrived at the figure for Trump’s net worth. That is assuming it’s not over your head of course. Trumpets are of a frightening ignorance and stupidity as your last five posts showing how utterly clueless you are about business has proved over and over again.
What makes you think repeating yourself is going to help?
I wonder if Forbes knows that Trump's businesses bring in nearly 10 billion a year... or if they would even care?
By the way, that's all BS, since Trump's companies are private. All they can do is make a guess.
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.