Posted on 02/02/2016 11:18:23 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday that Donald Trump lost the Iowa caucus because his criticism of Ted Cruz made him sound "like a liberal Democrat."
"I don't think Trump skipping the debate had a thing to do with what happened last night," began Limbaugh. "This is a Republican primary. It's Iowa. Conservatives win in Iowa."
"Donald Trump, I don't know if you forgot - one thing that everyone remembers - he went out and tried to criticize Ted Cruz," explained the talk-show host.
"Ted Cruz isn't the enemy," he continued. "Hillary Clinton is the enemy. Ted Cruz is not a nasty guy. Ted Cruz is not a Canadian."
"Nobody is going to believe that, especially when you offer that criticism sounding as though it could come with Bernie Sanders. In a Republican primary, you do not win if you're going to sound like a liberal democrat criticizing Ted Cruz."
>>If one is for Trump, is there a conservative talk show host or commentator who is left in good graces?<<
No, because Trump is no conservative. Any talk show host who is still supporting Trump without reservation is therefore not a conservative.
Rush has actually been trying to stay relatively neutral when I’ve listened to him (once or twice a week). He just points out things about all the candidates, both good and bad, but as soon as a ________(fill in your candidate) supporter hears Rush talk about their candidate’s negatives in any way, all of a sudden they’re “so done with Rush.”
It’s silly really. Rush hasn’t endorsed anyone and has given plenty of air time to discussing the pros and cons of all three, Rubio, Cruz, and Trump.
>>One thing that should be said, and kept in mind, is that Rush has been extraordinarily, almost over-the-top in his fairness to Mister Trump. And, I appreciate that as it shows objectiveness.<<
I agree, although some have construed his treatment of Trump almost as an endorsement. Instead, I think Rush has been fascinated by what Trump has accomplished in terms of changing the terms of the PC debate, and putting the MSM back on their heels time after time.
I’m convinced that Rush thinks Trump is showing the other candidates what can be done if they take some tips from him. I’m not, however, at all convinced that Rush thinks Trump is the best GOP candidate. But, as you said, he’s treated him quite fairly. I think that’s also true of his treatment of Cruz and Rubio.
>>Cruz is Reaganesque.<<
I completely disagree. One of Reagan’s greatest strengths was his ability to speak to a particular audience effectively. He could always gauge their interest and would modify the direction he was headed as it became apparent that it wasn’t working as well as he wanted.
Cruz absolutely lacks that ability. It showed in the last debate in two glaring examples, the first at the opening with his attempted joke that fell flat as a pancake and the second when he tried to illustrate how all the last questions were targeted specifically at him. (He wasn’t wrong; he just mishandled the delivery of the information—compare to “I paid for this microphone.”)
And then, last night, he went way, way, over the top in his acceptance speech, both in tone and length. No graciousness, just pontificating. Had he screamed a bit louder at any particular point, it would have indeed been his Howard Dean undoing.
So, no, Cruz is not Reaganesque, although he might well make many of the same decisions if elected. But he doesn’t connect with people personalliy; Reagan did. Now, Rubio on the other hand....
There’s a guy who’s name escapes me. He’s from southern Ohio and is on at night on the weekends. I thnk he’s guest hosted Rush’s show a few times. He’s pretty darn positive when it comes to Trump. I don’t know if he’s 100% positive at all times as is required or if he needs to go under the bus with Rush and the others, but he’s the most pro-Trump I’ve seen.
I have heard that Australia has a mandatory medical plan...it is three tiered, a gold plan with total coverage plan and you pay accordingly, a silver plan, which doesn’t cover you 100% and is cheaper, and a bronze plan which provides minimal coverage. You can opt for any coverage. But with this plan, the young and healthy can get by for many years on a reduced rate, up it during middle age, and get top of the line when they are elderly and more prone to illness. Maybe medical coverage needs to be provided along those lines? Maybe better minds can hone something more practical for our citizenry. I was horrified when I heard Obummer, say that 80% of the medical costs were (in effect wasted) being spent on 20% of the population...a dig I am sure that was mainly directed at the elderly. You get up in years, you do need more care. I would hate being denied medical care because some medical panel thought it a waste of money to treat me because in the scheme of things I was too old and a “useless eater”. And since Obummer’s election medical services have been denied elderly patients...open heart, hip replacements, and preventative things like mammographs after a certain age. Obamacare was just a way to get more money out of people. Those who could not afford care got it via welfare. And they still do. Everyone else, and the young who seldom bothered to carry medical care, are now being mandated to pay via their tax statement every year.
Trump has had lots of inspiration talking like a Democrat. For the majority of his years on earth he has been a Democrat.
I will forgive him for that because after his last performance at the debate on the Fox business network - he very willingly endorsed the mantra of ‘anger’. And he did it magnificently. So I figure we ought to give him credit for now being a Republican after enduring 7 years of Obama. Now, of only he would control his BIG ego.
Bad ideas, friend.
Losers.
I said like week to that winning Iowa is the kiss of death.
Iowa rarely picks winners, and then only if they are incumbents.
Yeah, he even started to make some excuse for Rubio’s Gang of 8 membership, but he didn’t get into details. I was very disappointed. I can’t remember when I’ve ever disagreed so strongly with him on something.
“Cruz is not the enemy.”
With his intimidating mailers, lies about both Trump and Carson during the caucuses, it’s hard to tell. He’s not running the upright honest campaign he pretended.
Cruz is great on the issues, but grating on the ears. I am not sure he has the ability to do in America what he did in Iowa. I will not mind if he proves me wrong, but I do not wish to take a chance we get a Goldwater this time around. It took 16 years for conservatives to get another chance after Goldwater. We don't have that much time this go-round.
Sadly it will be lost on some as they go about their childish ways, only to help the establishment and the left wing .
Love the tagline and wished some on both sides would stop being childish and stop their attack articles thinking it helps their guy when really it helps the establishment and the Dems
And DT? What is he going to do? Cheaper? No. Drug companies and med equipment companies own the business. Let’s make Dealer won’t let them sink or swim.
Gov’t shouldn’t be in healthcare.
I was (ill-advisedly?) using the term in a different way. I was referring to Cruz's ability to win people over to his policy positions. His Americanist logic is practically impeccable, and he is a good communicator when he has to stay on point. (In this regard, I think Cruz is even better than Reagan, because he thinks on his feet very, very well.)
Rubio is much more winsome than Cruz, and otherwise roughly as good as Cruz in general public speaking, but I don't find myself trusting him on policy--especially not on immigration policy.
>> but I don’t find myself trusting him (Rubio) on policy—especially not on immigration policy.<<
I realize Rubio has screwed the pooch with many people by signing on with the Gang of Eight, but I honestly think he learned from that experience.
I don’t know which debate it was, one of the earliest ones though, but in it he gave a very good explanation as to what now has to be done and that he had learned that it couldn’t be done the way he’d set out initially to do. In short, he sounded like he’d sincerely learned his lesson and that he was now setting out on a completely different course to address the problem, one that, if followed, I suspect most of us would probably sign onto.
I don’t recall the details, however, and obviously it’s a make or break issue for a lot of people. However, not as make or break as one would think, since Trump is every bit as much for some form of amnesty as any other GOP candidate, and more so than some of them, yet the hardest of the hardcore “no amnesty” group seem to be fine with Trump.
Trump was acting like a New Yorker.
Maybe it's not that simple. But if many of Rubio's generally conservative backers want to call it water under the bridge, it still smells a bit too much like sewage--and we all live downstream of this political bridge.
I prefer Cruz because he told the people of Texas what he was going to do--which was essentially to oppose the Establishment Republicans--and he went ahead and did it. IOW, I am proud of him for not getting along very well with most of his fellow Senators.
Rush, however, is at least partially wrong in this instance. Cruz had a huge ground game and spent a ton of money. That was the larger factor. I actually understated this on another thread, when I estimated Cruz had used 1 volunteer for every 4.3 votes for himself: - Cruz said he had 12,000 volunteers working in Iowa, AND 200,000 nationwide (some working the phones from Texas). Additionally, I don’t know how many people he’s paying (not even including the data / voter psychoanalysis people he hired for, IIRC, 3 million dollars.)
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/01/ted-cruz-trump-iowa-caucus-voter-targeting
The question is whether this can be sustained.
I also would guess Cruz could be attacked on the extreme level of voter profiling / psychoanalysis employed. At what point does pressure / manipulation go too far?
A question that bothers me is, why does Trump think he needs to cut deals with Pelosi & Schumer? Because he thinks the GOPe would block him?
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.