Posted on 02/09/2016 11:29:07 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Despite Donald Trump's victory in New Hampshire, what is the chance that Republicans will nominate Ted Cruz and that he will go on to win the presidency?
The website ElectionBettingOdds gives Cruz a 14.5 percent chance of winning the nomination -- his victory in the Iowa caucuses and what looks like a third place showing in New Hampshire notwithstanding. It puts his chances of actually winning the presidency at 4.3 percent.
But let's say Cruz beats the odds and wins the nomination. One of the most conservative members of the Senate, Cruz would test the argument made by leaders of the hard right that Republicans have lost four of the last six presidential elections because their candidates -- George H. W. Bush of 1992, Robert Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney -- were insufficiently conservative.
For more than 50 years, Phyllis Schlafly, the right-wing icon and founder of the Eagle Forum, has been a relentless proponent of the nomination of far-right candidates like Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.
In an Oct. 7, 2015, column, Schlafly wrote:
Establishment candidates have been unable to win the popular vote in five out of the last six elections, and that outcome is not something any Republican should want to repeat.
There is an unusual degree of consensus on the intensity of Cruz's conservatism among experts in campaigns, elections and partisan polarization....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Are you one of the few people who voted for David Dewhurst?
The act of impugning.
The resemblance to Ted is striking...
Looks like Trump outspent Cruz more than 2 to 1.
I saw a graphic that showed Trump 2nd from last in spending, just highet than Carson, Jebbery was highest at almost $1200 per vote.
bttt
Here’s the third headline right now:
“Chelsea Clinton says she left the pro-life Baptist church at age six because they talked about abortion in Sunday”
It’s Hillary pulling out stops. And she’ll always go back to abortion. That’s her base. Wha are they?
Who promotes and votes fir abortio?
They’re giving Cruz less than one in three odds of winning if nominated. I strongly disagree. Cruz has excellent odds if nominated - comparable to Trump and much better than Jeb.
He advocates losing strategies purely to further his own career at the expense of the party.
if Cruz were nominated, party leaders would âsit down and try to help Cruz run a better campaign, but he may not listen.â In contrast, âYou can coach Donald,â Black said. âIf he got nominated, heâd be scared to death. Thatâs the point he would call people in the party and say, âI just want to talk to you.â
Well stated.
By the way, the problem with focusing on job creation is that true job creation is a side-effect of economic growth. (If you just wanted to create jobs, you could pay people to move piles of rocks around or engage in other useless activity; that could give you full employment, but the country would fall into poverty and depression.)
If we take Trump at face value and presume that he isn’t just trolling us, his big-government centralized-decision economic policies would be a big drag on the economy. He’s not a free-marketeer.
As for Bernie, he’s clearly a Marxist in that he analyzes everything through the prism of class conflict. We know where that always leads (it doesn’t matter whether he’s described as a democratic socialist, or a socialist democrat, or a communist, or just a one-note left-wing lightweight).
Limbaugh and Levin will be pulling away the curtain at the right time.
You’re right about that. Trump’s unfavorable rating is in the high 50’s now. By November it will probably be in the 70’s, maybe even in the 80’s. That’s not a winner.
Salam Aka Lakum. Praise be to your Prophet Trump...
No I voted for Cruz, however I have buyers remorse so I will not be doing that again.
What does my vote in the Texas primary of 2012 have to do with “a fact is something that is objectively provable”?
Salam a hokum seems more appropriate.
They don’t permit the historical context of the Constitution. One of my major pet peeves because in EVERY literature class and Eng Comp 102 when learning to write papers on classic literature, HISTORICAL CONTEXT is a must.
I do have to admit, also, that when my spidey brain whips into a frenzy and I post here, only i understand what I mean. I have an issue assuming the others can fill in the blanks. The foundation must be layed otherwise the listener will fill in the blanks with their own reality and pipe dreams. Which is why it is easy to be swayed when the details are left out. People will interpret “make America great again” to mean what they want not necessarily what the speaker wants or how that change will be implemented.
The historical context of the Constitution is what I want and I also want to know the original intent of the Bible.
Cruz came in a respectable 3rd. Kasich nlew his wad in New Hampshire. I don’t think he ever left to go campaign in another state.
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.