Posted on 03/16/2016 4:55:39 AM PDT by jimbo123
Ted Cruz fought his way to second place in the Republican primary as the conservative who never compromises. But already, he’s learning to stretch.
Behind closed doors, Cruz’s aides are talking about how to draw more centrist supporters as Republican rivals drop out. They have given former Jeb Bush donors access to the entire campaign leadership team. And Cruz has made overtures to Senate colleagues who despise him, praising Mitch McConnell and Marco Rubio and talking by phone with Lindsey Graham.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
“Trump on the issues that matter, immigration, border security, jobs, trade and nation security is far more conservative then Ted Cruz.”
Trump is a populist running on a conservative platform. Maybe he will govern conservatively. Or he may make pragmatic compromises that are very unconservative. While I disagree with Cruz on some issues, his conservatism is ideological which means he will stand up for principle like he has on amnesty and funding Obamacare and Planned Parenthood.
The founder of this site supports Cruz. You’re telling him he should be ashamed?
***
NOT ANY MORE!
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3408723/posts?page=19#19
A quote directly from Mr. Robinson:
“Don’t look now, but Trump is the only anti-establishment candidate left running. The GOPe is now backing Cruz to the hilt and he’s doing their bidding. Fiorino has come out for the GOPe big time, and is throwing all her schoolmarm charm Cruz’s way. Rubio’s a fricking amnesty traitor and Kasich is all in big government GOPe.
Thankfully, Carson has seen the light and so has Sessions and they’re backing Trump.
Cruz has let his ambition get the better of him and has lost it. He’s been thoroughly indoctrinated, corrupted and absorbed by those we’re fighting against. He’s now fighting with the GOP and the establishment political class against We the people.
And unfortunately, some of our very own have been unwittingly sucked into the GOPe vortex.”
***
Your days of trying to hide behind JimRob are over. He’s seen through Cruz and dumped him.
What are you going to do about it?
Well, Cruz DID prove that he’d throw the First Amendment under the bus when he thought he could successfully take a cheap political shot.
Something a bit worse than any of Trump’s rhetoric, I’d say.
And whereas many of them have abandoned Lyin’ Ted for that, there are a few who are desperately trying to make themselves believe that he’s still a conservative, or even honest.
Denial then anger, it seems... So many stages of grief here on FR.
That statement shows your complete lack of understanding of the Constitution. Exactly what did Cruz say or do to "throw the First Amendment under the bus"?
1: Bernie (and in general, the Democrats) sent his people to shut down Trump’s rally, terrorize his supporters, and commit blatant assault. That in itself is a flagrant attack on the First Amendment, especially since they’re politically paid to try to shut the other side down.
2: Cruz spends two sentences in perhaps the weakest condemnation of these terroristic thugs that I have ever seen.
3: Less than thirty seconds later, he then spends over three times as long telling people that Trump deserved it, and, implied, that his followers deserved it. This is not only two-faced, but tells the thugs that he’s got their back because he’ll attack their target too if they go after him again.
4: So much for the right to peaceably assemble and the right to freedom of speech, eh?
Seems to me that you’re the one who can’t understand the Constitution, or for that matter simple logic or English.
And you call us cultists. Hah.
I will not speak to you any more on this subject; your desperation may taste sweet, but it’s very unhealthy for me to partake too much of your IMPOTENT INTERNET RAGE.
Bye.
I see your knowledge and understanding of the Constitution is about on par with Trump's, which is close to non-existent. While what the protesters did was wrong IMO, and probably illegal, it can't be a violation of the 1st Amendment. The First Amendment limits what GOVERNMENT can do to restrict your speech, not what other citizens can do. And those protesters also had 1st Amendment rights.
Less than thirty seconds later, he then spends over three times as long telling people that Trump deserved it, and, implied, that his followers deserved it.
Blatant lie. Cruz never said anyone deserved it. But in addition to condemning the protesters for violence, he also condemned Trump for his rhetoric which appears to condone violence on the part of his supporters and also appeared to threaten violence himself at times. I ti possible to oppose both sides, you know?
So much for the right to peaceably assemble and the right to freedom of speech, eh?
Once again, that applies to actions by the GOVERNMENT.
Seems to me that you’re the one who can’t understand the Constitution, or for that matter simple logic or English.
Wrong. I actually paid attention in civics class, and understand that an individual cannot violate your right to free speech, even if they are shouting you down, because they are not the government. Only the government can violate your First Amendment rights.
I will not speak to you any more on this subject
Yes, by all means wallow in your ignorance. Why if you actually understood the Constitution, you might not support Trump anymore!
You'll see that Trump is actually a "nationalist" - which is very popular after so many years of America being run (to the ground) by those in both parties with a globalist agenda.
But since those calling themselves "conservatives" are actually "globalists," who do not want to bring attention to their total lack of nationalism, they call Trump a "populist" rather than a "nationalist."
Sure move to the mushy middle that will work...
I really thought better of Ted.
Seems even the best conservative can make a misstep in the liberal direction every now and then.
“What are you going to do about it?”
I’m going to continue supporting Cruz, a good man and solid constitutional conservative, and will continue to honor Jim’s request not to trash the leading Republican candidates.
I invite you to do the same.
What about Freepers who support Trump, who brags about talking to Mitch Mcconnell, Paul Ryan, cutting deals with the establishment, etc.?
I will consider your invitation, but unless Cruz seriously reverses course on certain key issues, I don’t call him a conservative or constitutionalist.
Still, I doubt that he could possibly be worse than Hillary, so he’s got that going for him.
We’ll see what the future holds for the general election.
Despite all the snark, I hope that we’ll be on the same side come then.
Trump has one great skill: He gets what he wants by making great deals — because he gets along with everyone.
Cruz has one great flaw: He gets nothing done, he lacks the ability to make deals — because no one likes him.
I agree on the nationalism issue. A big part of Trump’s appeal is his America-first nationalism. And he is not an isolationist.
My reason for calling Trump a populist though is because his underlying philosophy in not conservative. He identifies conservatism as a successful platform. And so he is committing to govern conservatively.
Populism is not a bad thing. My concern is that Trump’s conservatism could easily go by the wayside as he seeks to broker deals and build a consensus. He is not guided by a deeply-held, philosophically-conservative viewpoint. He is more pragmatic.
I strongly prefer someone like Cruz who is conservative as a matter of principle. I may disagree with him on certain issues, but we share the same underlying ideology. For example, he opposed ethanol subsidies in Iowa even though many Iowans want the subsidies. This is comes out of a conservative viewpoint. (I happen to agree on this issue.) An example where I disagree is GMO labelling. Cruz opposes it because he believes science supports the safety and he does not want agribusiness over-regulated. I disagree because I think the science is flawed and people have a right to know what they are buying. But in the end, he will generally arrive at the right position most of the time because of a philosophically conservative view.
Trump might arrive at the same position, but it will be driven from a more pragmatic and populist point of view. An example of how this might manifest itself in a specific issue is Obamacare. A philosophically conservative candidate is one who would replace Obamacare with a free market solution. A pragmatist, like Trump, might simply replace Obamacare with a more efficient, less wasteful, form of socialized medicine. I am not saying this will happen, just that it is more likely.
What Trump has made unambivalenty clear is that he is against the Washington elites and their globalist corporate & media allies (including those who call themselves conservatives) who have sacrificed the national interest of America and its people on the alter of globalism.
And how can the GOPe's problem with Trump really be that he's not "conservative" enough when the same GOPe unhesitatingly backs a liberal like Kasich? The GOPe's real problem with Trump is his top two nationalist issues of immigration and trade.
But they can't attack Trump for his nationalism without calling attention to their own globalist anti-nationalism. So they attack him for his populism and lack of conservatism.
And as you may have figured by now, I am a nationalist conservative who despises globalist conservatism as much as globalist liberalism.
“But they can’t attack Trump for his nationalism without calling attention to their own globalist anti-nationalism. So they attack him for his populism and lack of conservatism.”
You have a good point about Trump’s nationalism. However, I think you are confusing exactly who opposes Trump. The GOPe oppose Trump for similar reasons they oppose Cruz. It has to do with their staying in control and maintaining power. It is NOT because he is a populist, per se. Ultimately, the GOPe wants a candidate who is NOT conservative. But you are right about them opposing his border enforcement plan, which is an extremely conservative position on his part.
I am not OPPOSED to Trump in my criticism so much as I am unconvinced of his genuine commitment to govern conservatively. Too many tale-tale signs indicate he will shift left. I am willing to throw in my support, but not unconditionally.
So Trump is experiencing resistance by GOPe and the very conservative voters for two different reasons.
Trump has won 2/3rds of the states.
Kasich ....1/27th!
Cruz....he’s won 7 states. 1/4th.
Trump...2/3rds of the states...Cruz 1/4th.
Simple math that some folks just can’t seem to understand.
” I’d like a Cruz supporter to explain their path to the Presidency when they got less than 20% of the Republican vote in Florida, Ohio, and Virginia. If you can’t robustly compete in these battleground states, then there’s no path to the Presidency.”
Exactly! There is only one reason for ted or Kasich to be in this now...to steal it from THE LEADING CANDIDATE...TRUMP
Trump has won 2/3rds of the states.
Kasich ....1/27th!
Cruz....he’s won 7 states. 1/4th.
Trump...2/3rds of the states...Cruz 1/4th.
Thanks!
Oh, no, and Haley has already made the overture to Ted! He didn’t have to do a think to recruit her.
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.