Posted on 03/23/2015 10:06:17 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
In nearly every presidential primary, a few candidates attract a lot of news media attention even though they have almost no chance to win the nomination. Sometimes they even lead national polls or win states, but invariably their appeal is too narrow to allow them to build the broad coalition necessary to unite a diverse party.
Ted Cruz, the Texas senator and Tea Party favorite, who on Monday became the first major candidate to formally enter the race, has seemingly been on track for this role since he first ran for the Senate in 2012. He is the darling of conservatives in a conservative party. But he remains a long shot, at best.
The most interesting question about Mr. Cruzs candidacy is whether he has a very small chance to win or no chance at all.
Political scientists argue that the single most important determinant of the outcome of the nomination is support from party elites: those operatives who can staff a winning campaign; the donors who fund it; the elected officials and interest group leaders who bestow the credibility necessary to persuade voters and affect media coverage....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Krusty’s Accountant: Let me get this straight. You took all the money you made franchising your name and bet it *against* the Harlem Globetrotters?
Krusty the Clown: [miserable] Oh, I thought the Generals were due!
[watches the game on TV]
Krusty the Clown: He’s spinning the ball on his finger! Just take it! Take it!
[the Globetrotters score]
Krusty the Clown: That game was fixed! They were using a freakin’ ladder, for God’s sake!
Right on schedule. Left and “right” outlets will have anti-Cruz hit pieces for the next two weeks at least.
Ronald Reagan was a very famous actor who successfully ran the state of California. The articles they wrote about him was he was "stupid".
“Why Ted Cruz Is Such a Long Shot”
Then stop writing about him. Go ahead, I dare you.
Reminds me of GOP voters getting behind designated losers like McCain, Romney and Jebster.
If they are successful once again saddling us with an unacceptable candidate, I hope people will let go of teir noses and abandon the GOP.
No bet. Either on when the article was written or against Cruz’s chances for the nomination.
Why We Should Ignore Ted Cruz as Much as Possible (Boy, that was quick!)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3270912/posts
The question being: Is what they say true in the sense of reflecting reality? Are the polls accurate? We conservatives stated the 2012 Presidential polls were fixed, etc. The current imbecile won hands down.
Ted Cruz would get my vote, long shot or not.
I’ve given up on microscopically examining
every candidate to see if they agree with me
in every detail. Now I look for the one or two
things critical to me and consign the rest
of it to STDNM (shit that does not matter).
I remember in 1976 when everyone was saying Jimmy who?
Yeah, I’m sure a lot of us were screaming at the tv during that second Obama-Romney debate just like Krusty!
Because he's not Hillary. The DNC, MSM and GOP have a lot invested in Hillary being president, so that's that.
Actually I think Senator Cruz has quite a good chance. He can unite the value/moral voters with the fiscal (tea-party) ones. Plus, he is for closing the borders, etc.
I think he has an excellent chance of winning the primary and then the general election.
He is probably the most intelligent and articulate candidate to come along in a long time.
I think he IS a WINNER and he fully has my support. As a moral conservative, my first choice was initially Huckabee, but I now believe Cruz is the better choice to meaningfully put forward those moral issues of concern to myself, and those other issues of concern to others. I see him as a great uniter of the difference “conservative” factions of the GOP.
He is the man. The closet thing to Ronald Reagan.
Somebody better tell that to the CRUZ TRAIN!
The media tried to build up Gov. Scranton of Pennsylvania but that didn't get very far...he was an unknown and just a "not Goldwater" vote. National Review had a joke which ran: "What do you think of Scranton?" "I don't know--I've never been there."
I was told if I voted for Goldwater that we'd have riots in the streets and would get into a long unwinnable war. I voted for him, and darned if they weren't right.
Any contrary examples?
Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, for starters.
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.