Posted on 11/27/2015 4:24:41 PM PST by Isara
It is no coincidence that with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) recent rise in the polls come attempts to downplay or diminish him as a viable GOP candidate.
Two recent columns, one each from the Washington Post and NY Times, attempt to do just that. A column on November 24th by obscure Washington Post columnist Paul Waldman titled “Sen. Ted Cruz could actually be the Republican nominee for President” is especially derogatory in nature. Although conceding Cruz’s rise in the polls and the momentum he currently has, Waldman makes the following statement:
“But from one angle - probably yours if you're a member of that vaunted Republican "establishment" - the idea of Cruz being the GOP nominee is absurd. He's been in the Senate for less than three years, he's never written a significant law, let alone one that meaningfully advanced conservative goals, he has no foreign policy experience or executive experience, and he's a singularly unpleasant person, despised in Washington by Democrats and Republicans alike. If he somehow won the nomination, it would be a disaster for the party to rival Barry Goldwater's defeat in 1964.”
And not to be outdone, right on cue comes NY Times columnist Maureen Dowd on November 26th featuring guest analysis from her Republican brother Kevin Dowd on the GOP and Democratic presidential candidates. From his analysis on Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), and then on Cruz, it is apparent her brother is towing the Republican establishment line first praising Rubio and then downplaying Cruz with these comments:
“Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL): Young, whip smart and self-assured, he has an encyclopedic knowledge of foreign affairs and is a stunning contrast to Hillary Clinton both in generation and vision. Wait until he starts delivering his speeches in Spanish.
Ted Cruz: The Hispanic heir apparent to Barry Goldwater had the best moment in the third debate, calling out an obscure cable TV host looking for his 10 minutes of fame.”
I will concede one cannot predict with absolute certainty the outcome of the 2016 presidential election should Cruz become the nominee, but the comparisons to Goldwater are premature. The GOP base has been waiting since Ronald Reagan for a candidate who will hold true to conservative principles. In my estimation, Cruz is that candidate who will bring the disenchanted GOP conservatives and evangelicals to the polls.
I hope to see more skeptics eat crow on Cruz. A column found on The Blaze could become typical. “Ok, I Admit It: I Was Wrong About Ted Cruz“, written by Justin Haskins, editor in chief of the New Revere states the following:
“So, as I became convinced someone had to talk some sense into the well-intentioned but delusional conservative masses, I penned a reasonable critical assessment of Cruz' chances against Clinton in the general election, warning Cruz supporters that he probably couldn't beat Clinton and that any money given to his campaign would likely be wasted….. But, given the current state of the race and what's likely to occur in the future, I have to admit that what I said before about Cruz was wrong. He can win against Clinton. In fact, he may have a better chance than others currently polling against him because I don't think any of the other candidates could handle Clinton (especially on Benghazi) in a debate as well as Cruz can.”
I couldn’t agree more. Well said.
Absolutely correct. We conservatives have been waiting for a candidate we can eagerly support. Cruz is that candidate.
What remains to be seen is will the LIV, moderate GOP voters and the liberals who seek to sabotage the GOP nomination process stick us again with a candidate for whom we can't in good conscience vote. If so, look for the next GOP nominee to get even fewer votes in the general than Mitt did.
And not just the media.cripplecreek, I'm so glad you brought this up. I don't want to give anyone the idea that Cruz handles all disrupting protesters in the manner he did with Code Pink in that incident, because he certainly does not. Cruz is not one to tolerate rude behavior.I wonder how many could have invited Medea Benjamin of Code Pink to the front of the crowd for an impromptu debate and left her stammering and apologizing to Ted Cruz for interrupting him. She even ended up calling him a patriot.
However, Cruz was thrust into a situation literally face-to-face with rabid leftist protesters from Code Pink and there were no security staff to remove them from the outdoor gathering. The way Cruz calmly and firmly controlled the situation was amazing. I have to say that was the most extraordinary demonstration of logic, facts and courtesy triumphing over rude, uninformed leftists. I haven't seen the likes of it ever from a public figure.
I was enthralled by this video that captured the confrontation from beginning to end. >>> Ted Cruz Takes Down Code Pink Hecklers on Iran
Yes, because it's such an incredibly common thing for the veep to be elected president. Please.
The difference between Trump & Cruz? For me it’s $2700. Guess who would get it.
Upon reflection, I suspect you are correct. Cruz has certainly had no difficulty raising money thus far -- both "hard" and "soft".
Just to reiterate, I wasn’t targeting you with my rant. I do like Donald Trump. I like the fact that he’s not PC, and that he won’t take the media’s crap. I’m not so fond of the fact that he wouldn’t stand with Kim Davis. If a candidate is going to stand for the constitution, then they need to stand for all of it. Not just the Freedom of Speech, or the Freedom of the Press, but also the Freedom of religion. Unfortunately, as our nation becomes more secular, the Freedom of religion will be under attack more, and more.
That is the reason that Ted Cruz is my vote in the primary. But as stated before, I could happily vote for Donald Trump as long as our Constitutional right to Freedom of Religion is protected. Because I’m tired of militant homosexuals attacking Christian businesses. Anyway, I hope I didn’t come down too hard on you, or Trump supporters. Trump/Cruz or Cruz/Trump 2016.
Trump is more of a Goldwater....however, there will never be a second Goldwater, as I remember him...
QFT and to let you know that the same thought occurred to somebody other than just you. This type of thing is also why I like how Trump has been calling the media to task on being so transparent with their true Democrat feelings. I think that eventually becomes an advantage for the entire field of GOP candidates through the primaries. I am ready for Cruz to continue his rise as the Iowa caucus draws near.
Nice post. I concur and add my voice to yours.
Led by Alan Grayson!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Anyone who wants to agree with him can line up so I can spit in their face.
I absolutely admire this man. I love how he communicates with people. I hope that I can meet him one day.
We have New York Times moles spouting this Ted Cruz is another Barry Goldwater crap here on FR also in their posts.
The way this article is written one could swear that many anti-Ted Cruz posts on here on Free Republic are from the same people, their speech betrays them.
Must be a dumb blond liberal woman joke in there zone where.
Not only that, Johnson won because he was the one in the public’s eye that was the force of stability and healing coming off the heels of JFK’s assassination.
There was no way Republicans could have won the presidential race that year.
They wish
And reason number three: a popular young president had been assassinated the year before. It was, in effect, JFK’s second term.
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.