Posted on 02/02/2016 12:20:14 PM PST by JSDude1
If the internecine warfare between the two top populist candidates continues, the conservative majority of the Republican Party could once again be forced to live with a nominee chosen by the Establishment.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Donald Trump placed first and second in Iowa. But if they don’t now combine forces and put aside their rancor, they may each find themselves losing the nomination to the third-place finisher, Establishment favorite Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.
Entering New Hampshire, Cruz and Trump have to play it smart. Cruz must recognize that he needs Trump to win in the Granite State. If Rubio wins instead, he will gain so much momentum that he will be almost impossible to stop.
Cruz is smart and must know he can’t take the Granite State, which has fewer of the conservative and evangelical voters that drove him to victory in Iowa. According to Iowa exit polls, Cruz garnered a third of the evangelical vote and was the choice of 44 percent of voters who consider themselves “very conservative.â€
Trump, on the other hand, is up by 20 points in New Hampshire and has a real chance of victory — a win that could send the soaring Rubio straight back to earth, possibly wrecking his chances and providing a major blow to the hopes of the Establishment.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifezette.com ...
That’s perfect, forget the doll though, he has money, he can clone a mini-me version of himself!
Reminds of the idea of a debate between 2012 Romney and 1994 Romney. Except with Trump he could debate himself from a month ago.
????
While they were wasting time killing each other, the Romans were trying kill both groups. But the post was really about the Jewish Roman war. Cruz and Trump together and even Rubio in that package could clean Hillary’s clock. But if they keep demolishing each other, they will open the path for an establishment stool pigeon like Jebber or Kasich.
His victory speech in Iowa was insufferable. 4 years of that is too much to contemplate.
Too late.
Rubio is the presumptive compassionate conservative nominee. He’ll be in til the end.
For Rubio to prevail, all the under pretenders must resign the campaign
Trump / Sessions.
what the real danger is:
party regulars will infiltrate the Cruz & Trump delegations. People who are Trump first, Rubio 2nd choice will become Trump delegates.
People who are Cruz first, Rubio 2nd choice will become Cruz delegates.
at the multi-ballot convention, it will prove to be impossible for Cruz or Trump to gain a majority. Even if they work out a deal.
Not saying it is guaranteed, but it is a danger. I am not sure Cruz has the organizational resources to monitor delegate selection in all 50 states. And he cannot afford to purge the Rubio 2nd choice people from his ranks.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/02/02/us/cruz-trump-rubio-nomination-paths.html
hard to find a path to victory for Rubio.
I guess Mich, ILL and Ohio in March could propel him. He will get delegates and a lot of 2nd place finishes.
He is staying in NH for the next 7 days. A bit surprising, but wants to assist on finishing off Kasich Bush and Christie. first post-IA poll in NH shows Rubio in 3rd at 12%. up 2 pts.
Guess you are not able to be more specific, which plainly shows the only way Cruz offends you is by challenging and beating Mr. Blowhard Big Bucks and there is not a conservative bone in yo body.
Cruz coming in ahead of him in NH would be quite not good for Rubs. If I were Rubs I’d absolutely stay in NH, go hard, and try to bloody Trump and bury Bush before SC.
IL RINOs are all for Bush and Kaisch, looking at the names of delegates. They’re gonna be sad if neither makes it that far.
Nope, not him. Cruz or Trump could still win.
What I’m saying is that it will be a 3-way instead of a 2-way all the way to the convention.
I think you have it backwards. The smart move would be for Trump to announc he'll serve but one term, to be followed by his vice-president- presumably Cruz- who will continue the repair work done by his boss.
But if Cruz doesn't want to go that route, perhaps some other candidate could be found.
“Unlike most candidates, at least we know WHO Ted Cruz would pick....JOHN ROBERTS and other sell outs just like him.”
But is Roberts really Cruz’s fault? I remember when W appointed him. Roberts seemed to have everything we were looking for.
Not sure what happened to him, but I didn’t see it coming. Did I miss something?
George Bush or no one else had ever heard of John Roberts before Cruz first recruited him to count ‘chads’...and then introduced him to Bush for SCOTUS.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/gop/3384862/posts?page=15#15
Depends imho on the grounds they choose for debating among themselves.
A primary is still an election among peers and not a powder-puff social or a pillow fight in the kids' room. As long as the candidates do not go the full-bull personal-destruction route (a la Karl "Rule or Ruin" Rove), they don't give Beastwoman and her media orcs anything red-meaty to use in the general.
FWIW I agree with you in general, but the Good Guys have really got to sort it out among themselves, esp. with existential issues like tsunami immigration and terrorist immigration on the table.
FWIW furthermore, I don't think Marco makes the grade on the immigration issue, he's a definite FAIL on that issue and a probable Rove/McCain corruptee on a range of other issues. Guys who are too ambitious are vulnerable that way -- that's why I prefer people the e-GOP hate viscerally, like Sarah, who imho is the by-God love-child of Teddy Roosevelt out of Calamity Jane and a direct descendant via Molly Pitcher of Joan of Arc herself. </ridiculous American-political hyperbole>
Truth in advocacy, I favor Ted Cruz and suspect that Donald Trump is in fact a typical New York 60's liberal who's mastered the conservative issues vocabulary and may have sympathy with some of them. He may be a patriot and sounds like a nationalist as well, with intimations of Manifest Destiny.
Cruz has questions to answer about where he is now on immigration and shamnesty, and does he owe people at Goldman Sachs anything. <disclaimer: I'm a foam-at-mouth Goldman hater: "great vampire squid" does not do them justice, it isn't sucky enough>
True, he's tapped into an inexhaustible river of (our) wealth. These guys were around 2,000 years ago and financed Judas Iscariot's 30 pieces of silver. (They laid it off with shorts on the Parthian shekel and a basket of Greek currencies.)
Compassionate Conservatism is neither.
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.