Ted Cruz Is The Frontrunner For The Republican Nomination

BuzzFeed News ^ | November 3, 2014 | Katherine Miller

[2ndDivisionVet]

What happens when you combine establishment credentials with a true believer.

The next week will involve a lot of talking about the “wide open” contest for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, about the strong field, about whether the strong field is irretrievably damaged, about how there isn’t a clear frontrunner.

This isn’t true. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz — the true outsider, the tribune of the grassroots, the ruthless lawyer — is the clear frontrunner for the Republican nomination.

This is not trolling. This is serious. Conservatives vote in Republican primaries. And Cruz is really good at talking to conservatives.

Even his enemies will concede Cruz is smart. And his resume is strong — Princeton and Harvard Law School; success at the highest level of American law; serious jobs in federal and state government; and an underdog Senate victory in 2012. The strikes against Cruz as a Republican candidate usually run something like this: He doesn’t poll well; the shutdown freaked people out; he can be grim; he’s not well-regarded among Senate Republicans. Cruz, who quickly replaced Jim DeMint as the most hated man on Capitol Hill, has been underestimated for what is basically a credential: Even Republicans in Washington hate him.

Let’s work through the rest of this like a geometric proof.

Yes, in the first big Iowa poll last month, Cruz trailed some other Republican contenders.

But more than a year before the Iowa caucuses, presidential polls are just tests of name recognition. And so they tell us one thing: The Democratic field is very closed; the Republican field is very open. That’s it. Mitt Romney polls very well for that reason — high name recognition in a field of parity....

[TexasGunLover]

Love him, but we can’t throw out eligibility requirements like they did for Hussein.

[ziravan]

Maybe Jeb didn’t murder Terry Schiavo, but he certainly was a Coward and his cowardice led to her death.

That’s not a quality I want to see in a Commander in Chief.

I know you weren’t sticking up for Jeb, just trying to define terms and reasons to oppose Jeb. Still. Being a Coward on Life issues may sell well to the GOPe, but it doesn’t sell here.

Complicit in murder may be too strong. I’ll give you that. Being a Coward is just as bad. Why? The results were the same.

[neocon1984]

Nice try.

Guilt by association is typically a leftist tactic.

BTW, what job does she hold? Do you know how she performs and how she votes?

[Agamemnon]

Ted Cruz's wife has a seat at the table of one of the most powerful banking companies in the world, and as the retired global business executive of 30 years, as you claim to be, you somehow fail to see the benefit to having one of ours in such a powerful position and possibly in a position to influence GS for the good?

Your knee-jerk assumption is that she's corrupt just because she works at GS -- and then you carelessly and blythely extrapolate that supposition on to the premier leader of the conservative movement in America today?

Did you routinely size up all your business contacts that way for 30 years, or did you muster some maturity of perspective to recognize that not all persons who happen to be working in or with powerful entities are corrupt?

Is it your mis-conceived position that everyone who works at GS is corrupt? I periodically advise GS market analysts with respect to pharmaceutical industry trends. Am I aiding and abetting the inherently corrupt, or merely doing business in my trade with a client who values my advice and pays my bills?

One wonders what you would have thought of Jesus's association with Joseph of Arimathea -- a powerful merchant in his own right who likely had to deal every day with some of the most unscrupulous persons in the ancient world. I like to think that his association with Jesus influenced the businessmen of his day for the better - so why not Mrs. Cruz in her role at GS today?

FReegards!

[csmusaret]

Not sure yet but there is time...Maybe Pence, Walker, Jindal. Kind of leaning toward Pence.

[ziravan]

I’m completely unconvinced that extensive experience in govt is a prerequisite for the Presidency.

Just the opposite. Extensive government experience is more likely to make an elected official jaded or bought and paid off.

I’d much rather have someone strongly convicted with my values. Experience, even executive experience, can be hired.

My problems with Obama have little to do with his level of experience prior to being elected and much to do with his ideology. More to the point, the damage he’s doing is a direct result of the latter and the former is all but moot to this Administration’s prosecution of its ideology.

Your comparison isn’t apt.

[csmusaret]

Leadership is the art of getting things done. Experience makes it easier. An ideologue might coincidently have leadership ability, but that’s a chance I’m not willing to take. Give me a proven, effective leader whose ideology I can share.

Experience is extremely important, but I don’t recall saying it had to be government experience.

Your argument isn’t applicable.

[X-spurt]

Actually Cruz held the Texas State Office as Solicitor General for 5 years. https://www.linkedin.com/in/cruzted

[VanDeKoik]

And here they come like clockwork.

Time to pick at the conservative so that the RINOs dont have to. People looking for merry-go-round 2 so that we split the vote so Jebush can slither by.

And which canidate are you backing?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Well, so much for the GOP-e claiming victory if R’s win the 2014 elections.

[ziravan]

It is applicable, for this reason. What you want is an ideal outcome: perfect balance of executive experience and ideology.

There are maybe 20 potential republican candidates with a chance to win the nod in 2016.

You’re going to have to find the right balance between those two qualities in the candidates available.

Given that, I’d much prefer an ideologue that might have leadership ability than a candidate with leadership ability that might share my ideological viewpoint. Experience can be hired out. A like minded conservative warrior is worth far more on the sliding scale between those qualities.

This isn’t an abstract concept. Among who can win in 2016, I’ll take an ideologue over a squish any day.

Plus, Sen Cruz is proving that he’s willing to take point on our issues, even when it annoys the establishment. He’s proving that he has leadership ability where it counts: he’s willing to be a shaper of the debate. THAT’S the main leadership quality we need at the moment - someone out in front on our concerns.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Must you crush every blade of the grass of hope that grows within the Republican base?

But, seriously, that is good information to know. Maybe I’ll vote 3rd in 2016.

[samtheman]

He gets my vote.

[xzins]

I agree with everything you wrote.

[csmusaret]

Both a leadership record and ideology are right there for anyone to look at. Anyone who is willing to look that is...Oh and thank you ever so much for telling me what I want. I never could have figured it out without your help. You seem to be convinced that Cruz is heaven sent so I will cease trying to convince you with the facts. Please return the favor and leave me alone.

[JudyinCanada]

I hope he’s the one. Let the RINO’s hold their noses and pull the lever this time rather than the conservatives.

[ziravan]

“Both a leadership record and ideology are right there for anyone to look at. Anyone who is willing to look that is...Oh and thank you ever so much for telling me what I want. I never could have figured it out without your help. You seem to be convinced that Cruz is heaven sent so I will cease trying to convince you with the facts. Please return the favor and leave me alone.”

So.

You come to a discussion forum in a thread about Ted Cruz for the purpose of dissing him.

But you don’t want to discuss it.

You just want your opinion hailed unchallenged. Oh, and to be left alone.

Got it. Good luck with that.

[GeronL]

We need a TEA Party convention before the primaries where we choose ONE conservative to get behind

[Arthur McGowan]

Civil disobedience was morally obligatory, precisely BECAUSE failing to engage in it WAS murder.

[xzins]

That would not hold up in a court of law if trying to convict Jeb of murder. Simply wouldn’t.

It would convict all of us who didn’t storm the location where Schiavo was being held.

I didn’t storm the facility. I don’t know anyone who did.