Posted on 01/22/2016 8:51:25 AM PST by ConservingFreedom
Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are trading their first attack ads in the GOP presidential race as their rivalry reaches a new level of intensity.
The billionaire launched his offensive Friday morning, unveiling a commercial that portrays the U.S. senator from Texas as weak on illegal immigration. Cruz returned fire later in the morning with a spot of his own going after Trump over his support for eminent domain.
The 30-second video from the Cruz campaign calls eminent domain a "fancy term for politicians seizing private property to enrich the fat cats who bankroll them - like Trump." A narrator goes on to detail how the billionaire invoked eminent domain while seeking property from an elderly widow in Atlantic City, where he wanted to build a limousine parking lot for one of his casinos.
"Trump won't change the system. He's what's wrong with it," a narrator concludes in the spot.
Cruz's campaign unleashed the attack ad just hours after Trump released his, a minute-long commercial that zeroes in on an interview last month in which Cruz struggled to explain his involvement in immigration reform efforts in 2013. The spot then flashes back to Cruz introducing amendments to the so-called "Gang of Eight" legislation that has become toxic to many GOP primary voters.
"I want immigration reform to pass," Cruz is quoted as saying at the time, "and that allows those who are here illegally to come in out of the shadows."
Labeling Cruz "pro immigration" and "pro amnesty," the spot mocks Cruz's denial that his amendments would have allowed people in the country illegally to stay permanently and obtain legal status. "Yeah, right Ted," reads text on the screen after Cruz is shown insisting his amendments would not have done that.
Cruz's amendments would have nixed a path to citizenship for people in the country illegally but left in place a measure to grant them legal status. The commercial goes on to contrast Cruz's collective remarks on the Gang of Eight with an interview last week in which Trump spoke of the negative effects of illegal immigration and vowed to secure the border.
"People want to take back their country," Trump said in the interview with ABC News. "We have to do it in a humane way, but we have to have a country. We don't have a country right now."
Announcing the ad, Trump's campaign suggested Cruz's stuttering answers in the interview last month, done with Fox News host Bret Baier, show he is a classic politician who was trying to take into account "advice from his pollsters, donors and the special interests who control him." Trump also took a shot at Cruz on an unrelated topic: his eligibility to be president, which the billionaire and others have questioned because the senator was born in Canada and did not renounce his citizenship there until 2014.
"Ted Cruz is a total hypocrite and, until recently, a Canadian citizen who may not even have a legal right to run for president," Trump said in a news release. "Had I not brought up the subject of illegal immigration, an issue which Ted Cruz is very weak on, nobody would even be talking about it."
Titled "Clear Difference," the commercial will run in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina as part of Trump's plan to spend $2 million a week on TV advertising at this point, according to his campaign. Additional details about the Cruz ad were not immediately available.
The ad comes less than two weeks before the first-in-the-nation caucuses in Iowa, where recent polls have pointed to a tightening race between Cruz and Trump, once allies who refused to criticize one another. Immigration is among the issues on which the two candidates have started to exchange fire, with each accusing the other of being late to the cause.
Trump's campaign is not the first to pounce of Cruz's amendments to the Gang of Eight bill, which passed the Senate but failed in the House. The campaign of U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who helped author the legislation, spent most of December seeking to show Cruz's immigration views were not too different from Rubio's, citing the amendments as proof that Cruz is not the hardliner he claims to be on the issue.
Cruz's campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ad. However, Cruz has argued that his amendments did not represent a de facto endorsement of the legal status provision.
"The fact that I introduced an amendment to remove part of the Gang of Eight bill doesn't mean I support the rest of the Gang of Eight bill," Cruz said in the same interview with Baier.
Trump is an attack ad in himself and his worshippers love it.
Watch them whine when Cruz’ “attack ads” address substance.
Trump is a walking caricature of what the Left tries to demonized conservatives as.
Trump will forever confound critics because unlike other politicians, he did not step forward to propound “substance” or his idea of it.
He stepped forward to facilitate an American consensus on what to do.
It’s up to “We The People” to step up to the role of substance channelers now. That used to be a piece of cake with “No King But Jesus.” And no, “No King But Cruz” is NOT a substitute for this.
Cruz’s ad on eminent domain is useless. SCOTUS says it’s a go, so it’s a go, whether anyone likes it or not.
Trump’s ad on Cruz’s immigration position is effective. it basically shoes him to be rather slippery, and it raises doubts regarding Cruz on an issue that matters more than anything else in this election.
Cruz has already lost this exchange.
Hopefully I didn’t whine too much.
Ted Cruz 2016!
I pray the Lord that somehow this dust-up will end up with Trump and Cruz both rowing the same way in the boat.
“Trump is a walking caricature of what the Left tries to demonized conservatives as”
But yet the “right” was happy with his attacks on the GOPE, Jeb, the media, and Hillary. They loved him bring issues to the floor that everyone else was too scared to bring.
But he’s outlived his “usefulness”, so he was really a bad man.
Trump is what the right would be if they actually had a pair and wasn’t more afraid of church ladies and the press.
It’s like so much “Eek! a demon!” political rhetoric. There’s nothing to actually see, at least in the direction the rhetoric is pointing.
When you look at how Trump has actually treated such issues in the past, you see a very respectful and humane story. In one instance Trump just left a refusing property owner alone until the person died.
What a crock. By your logic, if I say only "I don't like your tie" it implies I'm content with your shoes.
Whaaa?
That’s dumb. I say this without asserting any position on Cruz’s vote.
A simple counterexample is the poison pill amendment - simply amend the proposed bill in a way that will have many who currently support the bill change to oppose. That’s simple. And it sure as hell doesn’t indicate support.
Trump is a hypocrite he supports big gov. on to many issues he’s in the game only for Trump Inc.
A short anecdote detailing the DIFFERENCE between the crass, power-seeking POLITICIANS of yesterday and today with a REAL STATESMAN. It’s most likely WHY the man in this story had to be murdered. You attach the name of YOUR favorite POLITICIAN as appropriate.
Just prior to the 1982 national legislative session, the late Georgia congressman Larry McDonald (killed in KAL 007) toured the state with then-Senator Sam Nunn on one of those periodic pre-session dog and pony shows. Traveling with them was a young female reported for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Early in the tour, Larry chatted with this young lady and told her that if she sent honestly reported events on the tour, her bosses back in Atlanta would either “spike†them or rewrite them to put the worst possible spin on them to make him look as bad as possible. She replied that, as responsible journalists, they wouldn’t do that. Larry chuckled.
At one of their stops, the audience consisted largely of local peanut farmers. Sam Nunn went first with a report on the upcoming Senate agenda. During the Q&A, one of the farmers rose and asked his position on the peanut subsidy. Nunn replied that, since it was so important to the Georgia economy, he supported it and would continue to do so.
When it was Larry’s turn, he reported what he believed was in store for the House session. When the Q&A began, the same farmer rose and asked Larry about the peanut subsidy. Larry paused – then declared that he did not and could not support it as it was completely unconstitutional and went on for several minutes to explain why. When he finished, there was stony silence for what must have seemed an eternity. Then ever so slowly, a few of them clapped, then more applauded then, in small groups they began standing to give a standing ovation to the man who’d just told them a truth many of them never thought they’d ever hear from an elected representative, most likely because – in their hearts – they knew it WAS the truth.
Later that day, the young reporter came to Larry with tears in her eyes and told him that, while she’d reported EVERYTHING that happened at that earlier stop, her editor in Atlanta had rewritten it in such a way as to make McDonald look like a buffoon.
But then, the Atlanta Fishwrapper ALWAYS did that to Larry.
And that’s why Larry had to be “eliminated”. And it’s why guys like Cruz and Trump had better watch their “6”.
Unless, of course...??
Yes, If I proposed that my outfit was to be the standard to be worn at the office within official policy.
I’m sorry, a narcissistic ill-informed crony capitalist who relies on insults and self-promotion instead of policy is not what the Right with a pair should look like.
This isn’t Reagan, or Goldwater. He’s just a bully that people enjoy because he’s thrashing the Establishment people.
“I’m sorry, a narcissistic ill-informed crony capitalist who relies on insults and self-promotion is not what the Right with a pair should look like.”
LOL! What should it look like? George W. Bush?
Politics is war, and you want to go in armed with a guitar and some folk songs about “staying above it all” and “ praying for my opponents”?
“He’s just a bully...”
What are you, some 4th grader on a playground? You mean adults actually use that term?
I guess you rather support Ned Flanders. He wont say those mean old things that make your tummy hurt.
If you feel sorry for Democrats and weaker candidates, then that’s not our problem.
Sure...we need to win at all costs. Remind me how every time conservatives backed a demagogue who cares more about personality cult than the issues went?
I rather be stabbed in the front than in the back. If you think he wouldn’t sell out if he thought he could get the slightest profit than try not to look surprised when the knives come out.
“Sure...we need to win at all costs. Remind me how every time conservatives backed a demagogue who cares more about personality cult than the issues went?”
Conservatives have backed wimps that lost to GOPers....in case you haven’t been paying attention.
You’re the one not paying attention. How’d the Governator turn out? He was a manly man who was able to win.
Better yet, lets look at history. How’d Mussolini fare, or better yet Boulanger? Trump reminds me more of the latter.
Have fun getting screwed over, but hey at least it’s somebody new doing 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.