Posted on 12/28/2015 2:33:48 PM PST by Isara
Look at the Gang of Eight fight. Cruz basically gave the Rush Limbaugh opposition-- which was not opposing legalization, but only legalization before the border was secured and the pathway to citizenship. Rush Limbaugh even accused people who supported deportation for all illegals of being "seminar" callers, a fact I learned from an article I read recently.
So Cruz does not think for himself, but he looks to see what the "conservative" media pundits are saying and then goes off and fights and then usually doesn't accomplish anything.
Who led on TPA?
Not Cruz. He followed Paul Ryan.
Who led on the border wall?
Not Cruz, he didn't even mention it when he announced his candidacy.
Who led on illegal immigration?
Until 2 weeks ago, Cruz was still telling reporters that legalization wasn't off the table, and is now lying to his supporters about his history on the subject.
Who led on the Muslim moratorium?
Not Cruz, he's still telling folks the problem is "radical Islam" originating from certain countries.
Who was using the "let's bomb them to hell" rhetoric? Not Cruz, he only adopted it later. In fact, most of his rhetoric is stolen Donald Trump rhetoric.
Cruz a leader? Nope. He's a follower and a panderer.
He seems to be taking the universal heat now.
(And, smoking the field under sniper fire, per wishes of pundit in chief, Rick Wilson— a Republican.)
How much heat do we have in mind?
Obviously they talk about Trump the most because he is in the lead. That does not mean they would be happier if it were Cruz. The writer makes a very solid argument.
Those are the issues he’s running one, and his positions are wildly popular with those who’s votes he seeks.
I’m talking about him leading the country where doing the right thing won’t be as popular.
The currency should be persuasion
Cruz understands this but why don’t his supporters here?
Because he tells you so, over and over and over again. But then he votes for the Corker bill or supports TPA, giving Obama the power to pass what is essentially a treaty with a simple up-down vote.
Trump is outside Washington politics and unpredictable.
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.
So who is Cruz going to put in his cabinet? How many people are there with the necessarily qualifications who can't be labeled "establishment" or "elite"?
Chances are, he's going to pick people from the established Republican talent pool. Where else is he going to go?
Trump may give us Oprah or Omerosa, or who knows who. That at least, is what the Establishment thinks and why it fears him more than Ted Cruz.
PJ Media What No One Seems to Know About Ted Cruz's Past In his first significant leadership role , as president of the Screen Actors Guild , Ronald Reagan fought communist influence in Hollywood and prevailed in a tough contract negotiation.
In his first command , as a captain during the Black Hawk War , Abraham Lincoln overruled his men to prevent the execution of a suspected Potawotami spy.
To win his first congressional race, Richard Nixon disingenuously linked his opponent to communist sympathizers, the start of a pattern that would earn Nixon the nickname "Tricky Dick."
With presidents, the past is often prologue. So what do Ted Cruz's early leadership roles tell us about his presidential proclivities?
Now that Cruz regularly polls toward the top of an ever-shrinking field, his early tenure bears closer scrutiny. Cruz has gained fame as a social conservative and an unwavering opponent of Obamacare. In his first major leadership role, however, he developed economic policy as the director of the Federal Trade Commission's Office of Policy Planning.
At the FTC, Cruz's agenda could have been written by Milton Friedman.
Cruz promoted economic liberty and fought government efforts to rig the marketplace in favor of special interests. Most notably, Cruz launched an initiative to study the government's role in conspiring with established businesses to suppress e-commerce. This initiative ultimately led the U.S. Supreme Court to open up an entire industry to small e-tailers. Based on his early support of disruptive online companies, Cruz has some grounds to call himself the "Uber of American politics."
Moreover, and perhaps surprising to some, Cruz sought and secured a broad, bipartisan consensus for his agenda. Almost all of Cruz's initiatives received unanimous support among both Republicans and Democrats.
Ted Cruz a consensus-builder? He was, at the FTC.
From the start of his tenure in 2001, Cruz strategically reoriented the FTC to focus on ways in which government restricts competition. To lay a foundation, Cruz organized a conference on regulatory barriers to e-commerce. Large online companies, such as Amazon and eBay, explained that government regulation and legacy laws threatened the growth of e-commerce. For example: funeral licensing laws meant online retailers could not legally sell caskets into certain states, even though they typically offered much lower prices. Other laws hampered online sales of cars, contact lenses, and legal and medical services.
In response, no brick-and-mortar company defended the government's role , in regulating other industries.
Instead, like taxi cab drivers in New York or "green" energy companies demanding subsidies, every special interest argued that his particular industry uniquely required protection from competition.
The auto dealers complained that cars were too "sophisticated" for e-commerce, the funeral dealers explained that caskets were a product for "a very sensitive and specific time," and the lawyers expounded that “we're talking about something very different when we’re talking about access to the justice system."
Cruz had little patience for anyone who sought to use the government to limit competition.
After the conference, Cruz testified at a hearing supporting the online sales of contact lenses and pushed the FTC to file an amicus brief supporting online casket vendors. Cruz also initiated a comprehensive study of the wine industry, which found that online competition lowered prices without increasing underage drinking. The study's findings were ultimately embraced by the Supreme Court and by state legislatures around the country, who opened an entire industry to online competition and new small businesses.
Beyond the e-commerce initiative, Cruz also reoriented the FTC's use of antitrust laws. For most of its history, the FTC has focused on private conduct that harms competition, such as (allegedly) anticompetitive mergers. Under Cruz's leadership, the FTC instead targeted governmental conduct that harms competition. For example, the FTC successfully sued a state dental board to open the dental market to competition from non-dentists. This type of lawsuit primarily helped lower-income individuals, who would get more and cheaper options for basic health care.
Cruz also sent dozens of letters to states to fight new efforts to enshrine crony capitalism. Cruz sent a letter to New York to challenge a legislative attempt to impose a "minimum markup" on the sale of gasoline. This bill was a naked attempt to force gas stations to raise prices, but was couched as helping consumers. Cruz also sent letters to promote competition in financial services and energy markets. Through it all, Cruz kept his focus on the ultimate little guy , the consumer.
Perhaps surprisingly, Cruz secured a high degree of consensus in pursuing his agenda.
As an independent agency, the FTC has five commissioners, and during Cruz's tenure, two of them had served in President Clinton's administration. All five commissioners voted to support almost all of Cruz's proposals.
Thats what I’m talking about.
Maybe Trump will stand like a rock, I really don’t know.
Putting flags under Trump only serves to hide his true liberalism because Trump is certainly not pro-American is many of his stances. Are Trumpets that scared the truth about Trump will get out??
When Trump’s final deals start looking like W’s “No Child Left Behind” legislation, etc...(socialist), will you still be happy? Or how about the massive Medicare bill. Every time the right says it will negotiate with the left to get things does the result is bigger government. Trump will be no different.
I’ve been with Cruz from the start. But I don’t see a ticket without Trump on it if things continue apace. Would he take the #2 spot? If he threw all his support to Cruz would they follow?
You refuse to see because seeing it might divert your focus from Trump.
To support Trump it does not require hatred of all others.
Trump led his deals right into bankruptcy a few times. One time it led him to drag a property owner into court to try and get the government to swipe her property. He lost, by the way.
I appreciate the warning.
I do not agree.
Please read this article as it is the best I have read for what is actually happening/going to happen in this presidential election cycle.
I think Cruz supporters understand it. I am not so sure about others.
He’ll make those tough issues popular, or at least palatable, if you watch his endless parade of speech’s you’ll understand how he can do that.
They fear Trump because they know that he can win. Cruz is barely on their radar.
I am fast approaching dumping Cruz. At one time, he was my choice, but some of his supporters are so vicious that I’ve had it.
Well done, Cruz supporters. You’ve managed to succeed better than any democrat at alienating his base.
Most of the things that you listed like illegal immigration were positions stated by Cruz years ago, long before Trump ever even became a candidate. Stop falsely attributing everything said in the election to Trump because that false narrative is getting old.
The issue with the Muslim moratorium, although sounds nice, is the dumbest policy from Trump yet. Trump can claim he would outlaw Muslims all he wants, but he doesn’t have that authority. The courts and congress would overturn him before the ink was dry on his executive order because it is illegal and against our Constitution to restrict entry into the U.S. based on religion alone. That is one of those feel good policies that can’t and won’t ever happen.
Trump’s ability to make himself rich, due in no small part to his ability to buy politicians favor, is not good recommendation. There are a lot of contractors that were stiffed by Trump that probably would warn folks that maybe blind faith won’t work so well.
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.