It is one thing to engage, but what Trump is doing is lying out his a$$. Cruz proposed legislation in 2014 for a 5 year phase out of ethanol and that is still his position today.
Can anyone point to where any Freeper was saying that that was Cruz's stance even two weeks ago?
Go ahead, surprise me.
It is one thing to engage, but what Trump is doing is lying out his a$$. Cruz proposed legislation in 2014 for a 5-year phase out of ethanol and that is still his position today.
*******************************************************************************
And resorting to LIES is what will turn many people off.
Yeah, he's kind of late to the party, following the many sources which confirmed your point and even the correction made by the original source who claimed Cruz flipped. But, I mean, consider who you're dealing with here. He's got to try and fling some crap.
So then Cruz can man up and tell his story. Whining? There’s no whining in politics!
Oh my, St. Teddy never flip flops, says anything wrong or does anything wrong, does he? You Cruzbots are making a false idol out of a mere politican. Here’s something to chew on for a while - another example of Cruz’s flip flopping - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zBW8vLnRDY
I was unaware, am glad you posted that. I grew up in Iowa. I lived in Altoona, Iowa outside of Des Moines when Altoona was less than 1,500 people and "downtown" Altoona was one intersection with a stoplight that blinked Red (turned into a 4 way stop) after 9pm. Small town Iowa in the 1970's.
Corn planted post to post, as dense as you could get it during the Jimmy Carter years and then the family farms all got in trouble as corn prices plummeted and families lost everything. (At least, that's what I remember as a teenager at the time.)
Iowan's are good people at heart, good God fearing people --- but they're addicted to Ethanol. Subsidies ALWAYS artificially inflate prices by setting artificial price floors and that in a nutshell is the problem here.
Won't say I know the answer to simply eliminating Ethanol subsidies and the financial pain that's going to cause because I don't (know the answer to that.) I will say that ETHANOL DOES NOTHING to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. NOTHING.
My personal vehicle gets 16mpg/city, 22mpg/highway on Gas w/10% Ethanol. When I'm able to get PURE GAS with 0% Ethanol, I get just over 18mpg/city and almost 25mpg/highway with it.
My personal vehicle is a 2003 GMC Envoy SLT with the 4200 I-6, throttle body and cold air induction. I have just over 90,000 miles on it. Without going and looking at the door sticker, it's somewhere around 5,500 pounds, has about 300HP and 300 foot pounds of torque. It's big, it's heavy, all the torque is at the low end so it's a pretty good vehicle to do the following comparison with, and I've recently had it on a road trip so these numbers are current. A vehicle like this gets its best gas mileage right around 65mph and letting the computer (cruise control) control the throttle. Above 70mph, the gas mileage drops pretty quickly.
On a full tank of gas (20 gallons) with 10% Ethanol, I'll get @ 420-440 miles while keeping the cruise control on. Hills/terrain obviously impact the mileage. Typically I'll see 22mpg.
On a full tank of gas with 0% ethanol, I'll get 492 miles (24.6mpg) while keeping the cruise control on and keeping the speed under 70mph.
The math doesn't lie: 20 gallons of PURE, UNADULTERATED Gasoline goes FURTHER than Gasoline w/10% Ethanol.
Ethanol DOES NOT reduce our dependency on foreign oil. Never has, never will. Nor would Ethanol EVER extend our own oil supplies. How could it when I have to burn MORE fuel to get the same physical miles that I'd otherwise get without it?
And then there's all the energy it takes to grow the corn and harvest it, then the fuel it takes to convert corn to ethanol which makes the energy return of Ethanol so mathematically, horribly bad that it makes ZERO sense other than politically, do use Ethanol in the first place.
But that's just me I suppose.
Isn't that what Democrats do? Oh, wait . . .