Posted on 11/23/2015 10:16:11 AM PST by gwgn02
Legendary conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh explained to his vast audience a key difference between current Republican presidential frontrunner, real estate tycoon and reality TV star, Donald Trump and Texas Senator Ted Cruz, who has been running in third or fourth place behind Trump and Dr. Ben Carson, with Marco Rubio also in the mix.
On Mondays broadcast, the influential Limbaugh gave an analysis of the GOP race to the nomination, praising Cruz as being ideally positioned to be the nominee should Trump or Carson falter, and as the only " thoroughbred conservative."in the race.
"I think that there is a dark horse in this entire thing, and I think there is one candidate who is positioned here," Rush said. "There has been somebody trucking along here, steady-eddy, that has continued to be who he is and continues to lay down foundational markers for himself and thats Ted Cruz. And I think Ted Cruz is, is positioned, I would say ideally, "he contended.
(Excerpt) Read more at politistick.com ...
Okay captain obvious...
Now, if Rush can just convince Democrats, Independents, and Moderate Republicans to vote for Cruz, why he’s a shoe-in.
Unfortunately, he can’t.
Duh! Who knew?
RE: As for the rule of law. Cruz told both Bloomberg and then Time Magazine that legalization for illegal aliens is still on the table, despite him “opposing” it
Here’s what he means by what he said...
He was interviewed by the conservative talk show host — Mark Levin and they BOTH agreed on Cruz’s view.
NO AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS PERIOD.
How about children born in the United States of Illegal parents?
Here, BOTH Cruz and Levin do not say what they’re going to do in the LONG RUN.
In the short term, They both agreed that the first thing to do is SECURE THE BORDER. Only when we are satisfied that the border is secure will we talk about the children born of illegals.
So, is this for some sort of legalization? He and Levin are both SILENT on this.
RE: First of all, no, we do not want compassionate conservatism anymore.
The problem with the above term is the premise — CONSERVATISM IS BY DEFINITION NOT COMPASSIONATE.
That’s baloney of course.
Somebody had to say it.
Mark Levin is a stupid monkey who isn't challenging Cruz on the definition of amnesty, or his double-dealing statements to different media outlets. Levin and Co. are raking in thousands thanks to advertising money from Team Cruz. They like that money more than they do the truth.
YOU NEVER VOTE FOR A BILL THAT WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR WHAT YOU DON’T WANT TO PASS, PASS.
End of explanation.
Cruz can flutter around that truth all he wants. In the end he’s going to complain about him getting rolled, and I’m going to think he should have known.
Mitch McConnell? Mr. Smartest guy on the block didn’t see that one coming?
Not really, Rush has been all Trump today. He isn’t supporting any person’s candidate. They just want to think he does.
Understandable, but an errant thought.
If that’s true, that’s positive to hear. I’ve been too lazy lately to turn on the radio the past couple of weeks, except for coasttocoastam, and, damn, George Norry sucks really bad lately. His guest hosts are better.
Cruz has huge general election issues... I know he excites the chior, but he alienates a lot of others, and will motivate folks who are dejected at the prospects of Hillary to crawl over glass to vote against him.
Cruz’s biggest issue is to overcome is convincing folks he can win a general election, and I just don’t see it happening.... that and Trump has to collapse before he’s going to go anywhere, which also seems less and less likely daily.
TPA
Corker/Iran Bill
His apparent refusal to comment on, or state a policy on what to do with the illegals here now, beyond those that are convicted criminals
These are the only things that give me pause about this gifted man.
RE: His apparent refusal to comment on, or state a policy on what to do with the illegals here now, beyond those that are convicted criminals
It is easy for anyone NOT in government to say that they are going to deport what the law considers US citizens because their parents are illegal.
Being in government is another thing.
Happens every election around here. I think Rush would be happy with Trump or Cruz.
Geesh this crap is tiring, isn’t it?
There would seem to be a significant qualitative difference between a pipeline to transport Canadian crude across multiple States for processing in American refineries, thus securing a North American strategic supply of oil creating employment for thousands of people, and using eminent domain to forcibly evict someone from their home for a casino parking lot extension. I don’t see the former as Democrat ad material next October, but the latter? You bet.
RE: YOU NEVER VOTE FOR A BILL THAT WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR WHAT YOU DON’T WANT TO PASS
As I said, let’s not confuse his ‘Yes’ vote with his support for the Iran deal. It was a strategic mistake on his part.
That does not in any way negate the fact that he is one of the the most principled conservative in Congress.
Oh what a pant load.
I have posted on here repeatedly that Cruz fought corker tooth and nail. When it was clear it was going to pass anyway he voted for it as that gave him the procedural right to attack it again in the future.
TPA - That is his ONE aberration - and because it cannot be discussed it is a mystery.
So you are going to dismiss the only real pit bull we have in the Senate because of ONE vote?
Trump may not be owned by anyone - and I love what he says these days (mostly some of his ideas about government and business are not conservative) - BUT HE HAS BEEN A LIBERAL HIS ENTIRE LIFE UNTIL RECENTLY.
I find it absolutely childish that the Trump supports pay no attention to his past and only focus on what he says.
That is short sighted, poor, analysis.
Does anything give you pause about Trump?
It seems to me if add up all the negatives about both Trump and Cruz, the list for Trump is many times longer than the list for Cruz and many of those issues on Trump's list are more significant IMO.
Trumpeters have blinders on. Oh well.
Not if you're talking about transferring private property into the hands of private entities in order to enrich said private entities. If you're okay with the premise, all you're debating is which private enterprises should be the recipients of eminent domain benefits.
What might be bothersome about TPA is not that it was a mistake but that for a fellow who tries to be WYSIWYG it seems to say he believes in “normal politics.”
Whatever Trump offers, it does not seem to be “normal politics.”
I am listening to Rush today but did not hear this.
It is possible I missed it when I was outside for a couple of minutes but I will wait to read the transcript before I believe he said it.
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.