Trump brands Cruz a 'nasty guy'

Political ^ | January 17, 2016 | Isaac Arnsdorf

[Cincinatus' Wife]

The fracas between the Republican presidential front-runners escalated Sunday as Donald Trump went after Ted Cruz's likability, calling him a "nasty guy."

"Nobody likes him, nobody in Congress likes him, nobody likes him anywhere once they get to know him," Trump said in an interview airing on ABC's "This Week."

After weeks of circling each other, the gloves came off between Cruz and Trump in Thursday's debate, as Trump questioned Cruz's birthright citizenship and Cruz attacked Trump's "New York values."

[Impy]

Thumps up.

[JewishRighter]

Anyone who has to resort to the tactics Trump is using nad has to destroy one of the best conservative politicians we’ve seen in decades cannot be relied upon to do anything you expect him to do. Likewise, remember what you asked for when he is using the same slash-and-burn tactics to get things you don’t like. Do you know what kind of judges he’d appoint? Can you be sure he won’t revert to his very pro-choice stance? Do you seriously think he will fight to protect religious liberties the way a President Cruz will?

[Georgia Girl 2]

Actually I think Trump will be fantastic or I would not be voting for him. I think he will make excellent SCOTUS picks and he will kick those feckless quislings in Congress into action.

Ted Cruz should have known that failing to disclose wall street loans would be a problem for him as well as his Canadian birth. Trump did not make it up he just capitalized on it.

[BillyBoy]

The "Trump/Cruz ticket" fantasy always existed rent-free in the minds of Trump supporters (probably so they could psychologically feel good about supporting a liberal RINO, "knowing" that a solid conservative would be the "right hand man" in his government. In their minds, it was already a "done deal" once Trump gets the nomination)

Meanwhile, in the real world, nobody seriously considered the idea. Trump "considered" Cruz for veep only to the extent of hoping Cruz would throw his support to him after getting a piece of candy dangled in his face (Trump also "considered" the rest of his primary opponents for veep on the same grounds) but he didn't get anyone to drop out when he "floated" the idea of putting them on the ticket and abandoned this strategy some time ago. Cruz, of course, always had zero interest in being a figurehead yes-man in a Trump administration.

The weird thing is that Trump supporters seem to project their own worldview onto to everyone else, and sincerely think the rest of us out there secretly harbor some burning desire to see Cruz reduced to being Trump's waterboy. They're convinced that if they "threaten" the Cruz camp with "Ya know, we were ALWAYS gonna have Cruz as veep... but now that's NOT gonna happen UNLESS he clears up this citizenship thing and gets behind our man Trump..." , the Cruz voters will react like this:

OH PWEASE!! OH PWEASE!! OH PWEASE!! WE'RE NOT WORTHY!!!!! WE'RE SOOOO SORRY WE OFFENDED THE GREAT DONALD TRUMP!! PWEASE PUT CRUZ ON THE TICKET AND WE WON'T EVER QUESTION DONALD AGAIN, WE SWEAR!!!!

;-)

[JewishRighter]

“Actually I think Trump will be fantastic or I would not be voting for him. I think he will make excellent SCOTUS picks and he will kick those feckless quislings in Congress into action.”

Entirely without factual support. Trump’s history makes predictions impossible. The only thing anyone can say with certainty about Trump is that Trump is for Trump.

[Georgia Girl 2]

No you can say Trump is for Trump. I on the other hand can say that Trump is for America. :-)

[Georgia Girl 2]

No you can say Trump is for Trump. I on the other hand can say that Trump is for America. :-)

[Georgia Girl 2]

Why do I get the feeling you were never for Trump? :-)

[heshtesh]

This is standard Trump hyperbole. It’s his immediate reaction, taken to a greater level in front of cameras, with the intent of bullying Cruz.
We all know this Trumpian tactic and it can flip on a dime if he sees a negative impact. But it’s not an underhanded approach—it’s very public and transparent. It’s not a truly “fair” approach, but it’s tame when compared with the Democrats and the media.

Cruz should thank Trump for playing hard.

Thank you.

[Theodore R.]

Jane Wyman was a Republican when Reagan was still a Democrat, right?

[Finny]

Very well said.

Ted pursues the good and truth.
Evidence: When Rubio charged Cruz with 11 flip-flops, Ted admitted to six. He did not attempt to distract from the allegation or hide the allegations with lies. He did not sacrifice truth for his own benefit.

Trump lies blatantly and overtly.
Evidence: "Now Ted just switched his views on ethanol. He was totally against ethanol, now all the sudden he's for it, you know, it's Iowa and he's for it." Words uttered by Trump on camera about seven or eight days ago.

Trump lied to win people to his side. Those kinds of "winners" are losers.

[Mozilla]

They both need to chill out and focus on the issues.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I stand corrected. Jane Wyman didn’t like Reagan’s work with the Screen Actors Guild.

Thanks for the information. I had it backwards.

[Nextrush]

Ted “couldn’t rally” the others because the leadership controlled them and 95 percent of elected Republicans aren’t conservatives and need to be replaced.

If Trump were to support replacement of the 236 Republicans in Congress who supported Paul Ryan for Speaker, I would see that as something in Donald’s favor.

I would vote for Cruz or Trump as long as they don’t RINO up the VP slot or move in a liberal direction.

[JewishRighter]

I wasn’t so much for Trump as I was for what he was doing to shatter the PC media stranglehold on the national conversation. I was also fine with him as an alternative to Ted Cruz until Trump turned so vicious on Cruz. I always criticized Trump’s slashing style as something I’d rather not see in a conservative candidate. To me Ronald Reagan has always been the model conservative candidate: always polite and gracious, always keeping the 11th commandment and yet, he could still fight his political opponents effectively with humor and articulate argument.

[JewishRighter]

Other than his rhetoric, he has nothing to show that he is for America.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

-— Nobody likes him, nobody in Congress likes him, nobody likes him anywhere once they get to know him,” Trump said in an interview airing on ABC’s “This Week.” -—

“And when he comes down to the cafeteria for lunch, let’s all turn our backs on him, OK?!” added Trump.

[samtheman]

Why do I get the feeling you were never for Trump? :-)

---

Because posters who claim to be dropping support for a candidate are just pretending previous support for the sake of drama?

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

LOL

[JewishRighter]

Reading is fundamental. My prior response to gg2 :

I wasn’t so much for Trump as I was for what he was doing to shatter the PC media stranglehold on the national conversation. I was also fine with him as an alternative to Ted Cruz until Trump turned so vicious on Cruz. I always criticized Trump’s slashing style as something I’d rather not see in a conservative candidate. To me Ronald Reagan has always been the model conservative candidate: always polite and gracious, always keeping the 11th commandment and yet, he could still fight his political opponents effectively with humor and articulate argument.