Posted on 01/16/2016 9:18:45 AM PST by Isara
FORT MILL, S.C. — Ted Cruz, long reluctant to directly criticize Donald Trump, threw caution to the wind Saturday as he ripped his Republican presidential opponent as a fake conservative.
"Donald’s record does not match what he says as a candidate," told reporters before a national security forum here at a church, delivering an assessment of the onetime ally in the race that would have been unthinkable as recently as last week. "I recognize what Donald says on the campaign trail today is fairly conservative, but voters are discerning."
Cruz went on to respond to a serious of critical tweets earlier Saturday morning from Trump by questioning his judgment and temperament to be president. The senator suggested Trump's tweets were caused by a new poll that show him beating the survey-obsessed billionaire in a head-to-head match-up.
"That has got to drive him nuts, and I imagine it sent him out of bed this morning tweeting and tweeting and tweeting," Cruz said. "I think in terms of a commander in chief, we ought to have someone who isn’t springing out of bed to tweet in a frantic response to the latest polls."
"I think the American people is looking for a commander in chief who is stable and steady and a calm hand to keep this country safe," Cruz added.
Cruz also wondered aloud why Trump had reacted angrily to comments Cruz made a day earlier blasting the policies of New York Democrats. The two candidates have been tangled over Cruz's use of the phrase "New York values."
“It does raise the question of, 'OK, if you are offended at my pointing out how much the failed policies of Hillary Clinton and Andrew Cuomo and Bill de Blasio have hurt New Yorkers, then which of those policies do you agree with?" Cruz said. "Given the fact that for much of his life, Donald was financially supporting those politicians, writing checks to Hillary Clinton, writing checks to Andrew Cuomo, it’s a fair inference that he supports their policies."
Cruz added he was especially surprised that Trump would object to the idea of "New York values" because "he's the one who laid out this analysis" in a 1999 TV interview. In the interview with Tim Russert, Trump repeatedly attributed his liberal stands on some issues to the fact he is from the solidly Democratic Empire State.
Cruz continued to sketch a number of other contrasts with Trump, bringing up gun and property rights when pressed to detail policy differences with the billionaire. Asked to say where he differs with Trump on national security, Cruz flatly replied, "To be honest, I don't know what Trump's position is."
Cruz's remarks to reporters in Fort Mill represented the sharpest escalation yet in his rhetoric against Trump after months of refusing to attack the billionaire. Asked why he was now raising the Tim Russert interview, for example, Cruz suggested it all began with Trump's questioning of his eligibility to be president due to his Canadian birth.
“Well, it came up initially in response to Donald playing 'Born in the USA' in his rallies," Cruz said. "I made a quip that perhaps he ought to play 'New York, New York,' and Donald got very upset with that."
Cruz and Trump were set to cross paths later Saturday in Myrtle Beach, where they are both set to speak in the afternoon at a tea party convention.
Failure is the result of trying.
There are no successful men or women in America who haven’t failed.
Failure is prerequisite to greatness.
...but you wouldn’t understand. Tell your mom and dad I said hi when you go upstairs for a glass of milk.
Go Trump Go!
I agree. Trump should go full New York Values on Cruz. I only wish he had done it sooner, but it’s not too late.
Well, Iowa caucus voters aren’t nearly as obtuse as FR Trumpbots.
Qualification as in natural born, or do you mean in some other wise?
Watch out or fairly soon you’ll be recognizing Truthbots.
Speaking of Trump tweet binges.
Finally!
Yes, qualification as in NBC. I’m saying that (in my mind I’m convinced) he knows he is not.
It’s a schtick and he shouldn’t let himself be a slave to it because he’s going to have to deal in more dignified terms sooner or latter.
On the other hand, we could objectively look at whether Malkin is in some sense a dummy and was in some sense born stupid.
News flash: we were all born stupid. So nobody comes out on top here. But being a dummy now means you haven’t learned.
There’s an open argument to be made about what the constitution supports in that wise. Can Congress set these parameters or must it be set in stone according to what the constitution had embraced at its writing. Cases can be made for both.
Obama dodged it through courts that were unwilling to grant anyone standing. That dodge can’t last forever.
It would not stop me, if still not adjudicated, from casting a vote for Cruz in the generals. I can take a loose view when there is a doubt and that is advantageous.
Imagine trying to carry on this vicious firing circle with both sides disallowed from bringing up the past! We’d all be friends again!
Calls Frank Luntz a “total clown” and Geroldo Rivera a “true champion.”
Part of this can be chalked up to hyperbole. Anyone who does not now know Trump deals in hyperbole in political criticism, must have been living under a rock his entire life (as I say with my own hyperbole).
The right answer to that isn’t to just bristle, it is to restore the discussion to a fine enough detail to evaluate the statement.
There is such a thing as forgiving and trying to proceed forward.
We want America to win here, at the least. It would be nice if the whole world could win too.
That only means he knows what he’s talking about. It also means he could be right in there with the best of the NYC elitists but chooses not to.
But Ted Cruz IS the GOPe. So is his wife. It's the Republican version of the "2-for-1" deal the Clintons offered. Cruz is as phony as those silly cowboy boots he wears every day in Iowa.
There is no informed argument to the contrary, that is honest. Not for Cruz, maybe for some other marginal case, like birth abroad during vacation, but not for this case. Not if the constitution is followed.
-- Obama dodged it through courts that were unwilling to grant anyone standing. --
Obama dodged it because nobody in Congress and none of his opponents in election challenged based on being born to an alien father who had never resided in the US. His qualification was, in legal terms, "conceded." It could have been challenged by ANYBODY in Congress, and ANY of the parties that lost the pres race to the DEM slate. No challenges. Party hacks and congress gave him a pass.
-- I can take a loose view when there is a doubt and that is advantageous. --
We each have to do our own practical and moral calculus. Life is sometimes tough that way.
Well he ought to try not to let Donald pull him down to the snotty level.
LOL
I support Cruz because I feel he'll be a much better President than anyone still in the GOP race. Earlier I had supported Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Trump is not a conservative or even a Republican.
But, given my personal political experience, only Trump can beat Trump. This has been his race to lose since the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California in December. Cruz and Rubio then had a few weeks to reinvent themselves as "national security is my first priority" candidates, didn't and lost. A prevent defense prevents you from winning when you are behind, and they were way behind after San Berdoo.
IMO there were lots of reasons for Cruz & Rubio's failure to move on this at all, let alone fast enough. But what is really happening is that Trump is winning fair and square. His personal campaign skills are in the same league as those of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. He and his campaign anticipated most every possible development, made scripts to exploit those in advance, have done so and he made his name brand long ago.
At this point I don't believe even major gaffes by Trump can defeat him. His supporters, which IMO are most probable voters, just aren't listening anymore. A full-bore Jacksonian uprising, a la _The Age of Jackson_ by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.,, complete with a staggering "Bradley Effect" (look it up on Wikipedia) are in progress. Plus events are really big-time proving the validity of Trump's policies on national security, immigration and crime.
I think Trump will be elected President unless he is assassinated first. My prediction as of a month ago was, and still is:
Trump will win the first three GOP presidential primaries of New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada, with about 40% of their combined votes, then carry all or almost all of every GOP primary on Super Tuesday with about 50% of their combined votes. At that point the nomination will be effectively decided in his favor.
He will then go on to win in November, very possibly with a 40+ state landslide.
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.