Posted on 01/15/2016 5:58:19 AM PST by reaganaut1
Cruz did himself no favors when he said "at least half of what Marco Rubio said is (blatantly) false."
Only half, Mr. Cruz? So which points were accurate?
This fight's coming down to Trump and Cruz, that's obvious. As much as I like the fact that Trump's a "fighter" and that's what this country needs right now, there was little doubt who won the debate (Cruz.) His debating skills are admirable.
I think you are about right, except I think the NY values section was more memorable than the birther section. Good summary.
After the debate, Cruz (my #2 choice) had diminished in my esteem for him.
1. He doubled down on the “New York values” statement. Nothing like pissing off a large block of voters. Not that he’d have a chance in NY, anyhow. Still, it was offensive and showed poor judgment on his part. On the creepiness scale, it was on par with Obama’s “bitter clinger” statement about Middle America people.
2. Questioning Trump’s eligibility because his mother was born in Scotland. WTF? When he pulled that thought out of his ass, what made him think it was a good idea? Not even close to being an issue.
3. For the last couple weeks I’ve thought, and posted, that Trump was focusing on the Cruz eligibility issue TO HELP CRUZ, in case Trump wanted to tap him for the VP slot. Trump’s not one to put action on hold to dilly-dally during some court battle. He’ll pick someone who can hit the ground running from Day One. If Cruz can get the Declaration NOW, he’ll be free to become VP now, then President. How dense can Cruz be not to recognize this?
Also, if Cruz were to become the nominee, the Dems will see to it that we’re mired in court battles for months. Flashback to the Gore/Bush crap. We do not need that angst in America at this point in history.
He might be a good lawyer when he has documentation, i.e., the Constitution and law journals to memorize and refer to. I’m not impressed with his overall critical thinking skills.
(I’d still vote for him if he’s the candidate.)
Trumps played the "Victim" card, yes I am talking about NY.
The tragedy of 9/11 was not a just NY tragedy, it was ALL of the United States tragedy. It was not just NY's people who came to help, it showed a United States who came as they do in every tragedy. NY is not the only victim of tragedy.
Can all the other tragedy Cities play the Victim Card?
New Orelan's.....Victim card?..... NO. Who was it that came to help? All across the US they came to assist.
OKC........Victim card?.......NO, people from all over the US came in to help.
Sandy Hook.......Victim Card? No, many outsiders came in to help.
All the other tragedies across the US......no one has a special Victim Card license.....When tragedy strikes Americans do what they do best, HELP OTHERS in dire need. It is the American way.
So lets face it.....NY is not a lone Victim...9/11 was WAR on America......
We here on FR often ridicule NY, MA, etc. (the Yankees) for their very LIBERAL values, and that is exactly what Cruz was speaking to. America still mourns for 9/11 and all the other tragedies, it will never leave us....
JMO......and I will not change it.
The vast majority of those feigning outrage over Ted's remark are Trump supporters who would be cheering that same remark if Trump was not in the race and Ted made that remark with regard to Hillary or Bloomberg. I don't take their outrage seriously.
Who represents New York values the best? The voters in New York say Chuck Schumer and Hilary Clinton. At least that's who they vote to send to the U. S. Senate.
If anyone wants to promote New York values, elect Hilary Clinton as president.
>> Careful that your bulldozer doesn’t turn out to be a honey wagon <<
Not only that:
You let an inexperienced, anger-prone, over-confident show-off drive a bulldozer for the first time — and he may loose control and drive it into the ditch.
Or even drive it off of a cliff!
>> Looking at it that way Trump has the best oratory skills of anyone running <<
When it comes to timing and other acting skills, Trump is a natural-born master. No question.
And among other things, he now may be feigning “anger” as a tool to woo the conservative base and the blue-collar Democrats.
But he’s also shrewd and clever enough to know that the USA usually doesn’t select an “angry” guy as POTUS. A sunny disposition is a much better ticket to the WH.
Therefore, it won’t surprise me if during the General Election campaign, we’ll see a much kinder and gentler Trump as the GOP candidate.
"'Will you walk into my parlour?' said the spider to the fly"
It was an amendment to the budget not a defense bill, so take your liar label and stick it somewhere else.
>> I get some sort of Joel Osteen preacher vibe from Cruz <<
Maybe you just cotton to the Houston accent of both men!
Thank you, I did do a Google, but it still gave me what I wrote. Call mine poetic license gone bad.
I'm being unfair, probably, because he has to turn it (passioned expression) on and off many times a day in stump speeches.
Does anyone know specifically which defense billls? Would love to find out what else was in them.
As we all know by now, they’re generally loaded down with items that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic..so goes DC game.
In the introduction of the candidates, did you hear how the loudest clapping and cheering was for Bush? I have not heard anyone say anything about Bush on these forums, is he done? Is the donor class slinking away from him? Are they pissed at the base for ruining their cush jobs and favored policies? So, so great!
SmokingJoe, what are you smoking?
First of all, the NDAA is, as its title indicates, an authorization bill, meaning that it approves programs and general initiatives for the military. It does not fund the military. The troops are funded through the annual appropriations process.
Secondly, both Rubio and Cruz have consistently voted against those bills. Last year, both Cruz and Rubio voted against the $1.1 trillion omnibus. Rubio has voted against almost every stopgap spending bill and spending package he’s had the chance to vote on.
So has Cruz, who most notably helped lead the conservative revolt against the GOP leadership in October 2013. This led to a 16-day government shutdown, convincing fellow tea partiers to oppose any spending bill that included funds for Obamacare.
Ted Cruz: “Yes, it is true that I voted against the National Defense Authorization Act, because when I campaigned in Texas, I told voters in Texas that I would oppose the federal governmenhaving the authority to detain U.S. citizens permanently with no due process,†Cruz said. “I have repeatedly supported an effort to take that out of that bill, and I honored that campaign commitment.â€
Rubio was lying as usual.
What more ya got, Mr Weasel?.
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.