Smokin'!!
Stand up for America. Come to
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.
That’s great
Trump has said he just uses the system as it is to make money.
He has seen what the Clinton’s have done to make money.
He knows he can do better, and legally, than the Clinton’s.
If he makes a lot of money making the country great again, that is better than Yeb and others.
As Cruz, and others, have said, anyone on this stage is better than Hillary (or Obama).
Cruz is still my first choice.
Well, for one thing he disrupted the Gang of Eight.
Except his corporate donors.
No one knows what Trump will do; they only know what he says he will do.
He has no record and has supported liberals in the past.
He is a great salesman and lots of folks have abandoned what they claim to believe due to his sales pitch.
Jimmy Carter banned immigrants from IRAN not of a certain religion, which shows your ignorance on this topic. Cruz has already suggested doing what Carter did and ban people from terrorist supporting countries, which is legal and would stop most muslim immigration.
It is illegal to discriminate or persecute based on religion. That is the law and the reason that banning muslims is absurd and will never work.
Not to mention, do you actually think muslims will tell you that they are muslims if we ban muslim immigrtation if they are intent on attacking our country?? If you’re that naive then maybe our litmus test should just be to ban all muslims admitting to future attacks on the U.S. That makes about as much sense.
Sorry, but TRUMP has already plead on that. He said, “GUILTY, AS CHARGED”, and gave reason.
Now, we’re movin’ on and it’ really fun out here.
One big problem in the article. The claim that Hillary will beat Trump is total nonsense.
Trump has amassed a fortune by buying favor with politicians. I’m just not that excited that now he has decided he wants Power to go along with it.
There is no record that Trump has ever taken a stand for anything other than his own interests. I’m not in the mood to cast my vote on blind faith.
I liken their posts to a situation I faced every time I went to a state or national convention of Professional Counselors. Those counselors in my area I knew who went to these conventions, became people I did not know. They stayed drunk and caroused around with people of the opposite sex and shared rooms back and forth. They thought they were safe away from home, no one would know, and they did their thing. I believe posters who post nasty/cutting remarks to others are like these counselors - no one will know they did it, so they do it.
Let your common sense determine the best candidate based on your conservative criteria.
Forgeddaboutit! TRUMP. This is TRUMP we’re talking about.
Gladiators don’t tend to serve their mascots. Do you seriously see him as a VP! ROTFL!!!
Are you using the word "support" because you know he voted for both but want to make some kind of "well, he voted unwillingly!" kind of argument? Though with TPA, yes, he supported it. He campaigned for it. He ridiculed conservatives as internet conspiracy kooks and parroted Paul Ryan talking points about how the bill "does not affect immigration law," shutting down debate on what it really does. And then after he campaigned for it and voted to bring it to the floor, even voting against amendments that would have made it better, he got bombarded on his facebook page by THOUSANDS of supporters, and then, all of a sudden, claimed that McConnel had tricked him and voted against it at the last minute-- after its passage was guaranteed.
If Trump rids the nation of illegal aliens and murdering islamists and nothing else it will still have been worth electing him. IMO
Ok, but if you give Trump a pass on all of his “Guilty As Charged” support of the democrats and liberal agenda for the last 30 years then you have to give Cruz a pass on those few issues that Trump supporters now claim show Cruz waffled on his conservative values. You can’t have it both ways. If you hold Cruz accountable then you must hold Trump accountable too!
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful post, Marcella. I do appreciate it.
One of a major new series of "please don't throw me in the brier patch" articles.
Oh....ok.
Do we have anything beyond this? Because according to these fawning bloggers, Cruz has derailed Obama’s agenda all by his lonesome and literally runs the congress.
Cruz has demonstrated himself a very able politician. And that’s the problem.
A principled Constitutionalist and a politician.
So whats the problem?
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.