Posted on 03/09/2016 1:57:08 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
DEAR REPUBLICANS, IT'S TED CRUZ
What is the rationale for Marco Rubio's candidacy?
The latest poll out from the classiest and most reliable Florida pollster, Quinnipiac University, says there is none.
After a week of disappointing elections for Rubio, the Florida Q Poll is the dagger to the heart of his presidential aspirations. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush can be happy that while his own bid failed, at least he killed the one his campaign staff called "Judas." Enjoy Fisher Island.
The poll shows frontrunner Donald Trump doubling up Florida freshman Rubio with less than a week to go before the winner-take-all contest for 99 delegates. Coming after a disastrous election night it should be enough to send Rubio packing.
The only argument for Rubio's continued candidacy was the "Romney Plan" in which voters should support any candidate in any race that can beat Donald Trump or deny him delegates. It worked pretty well in Michigan where Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas and Ohio Gov. John Kasich soaked up the majority of delegates with their tie for second place behind Trump....
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
People should fear Ted more than Trump. Trump is against Obamatrade and TPP.
Absolutely right. Cruz is envisioned by the democrats the same way that Obama is envisioned by republicans. Cruz is the radical right representative and will galvanize Hillary voters. We will have 4 more years of total gridlock with either Cruz or Hillary.
With Trump the glass is 2/3 full...there is a little bit give and take...the country heals. Anything else is total partisanship gridlock.
I cannot think of any states that Cruz could flip to even narrowly win the Electoral College, much less decisively win it. At best, he loses closely.
Cruz will just go through the motions and lose.
“They rather lose to Hillary than win with Combover
Cruz they will begrudgingly accept because they retain some influence”
Not sure about the latter, agree with the former.
If Rubio quits before Florida and endorses Cruz and campaigns with him, I’d agree.
That was a nice piece of theater.
Yeah right. Thes 8 months into the future polls are even less accurate than the ones that had Hillary beating Sanders by 30% in Michigan.
Ted Cruz, all I can say is Glenn Beck. Most here know Cruz is a insider just his dbig donors.
Cruz has many former Bush people on staff. So he’ll act like Bush
And don/t forget the many personal traits driving him up the political ladder:
<><> Cruz/s industrial strength narcissistic personality.
<><> his lifelong self-absorption.
<><> putting himself first above others,
<><> always acting like he is better than the rest of humanity.
<><> a snob in spades....feeling he is destined for greatness.
<><> Cruz wouldn/t play team sports b/c he/d share the glory with others.
<><> His vaunted debate championship was not in the National Debate Tournament of 2-person teams;
<><> Cruz debated in a Canadian tournament where he received all the credit himself.
<><> his Senate reputation where most of his colleagues despise him....is well-deserved.
That’s like arguing that a businessman who for years pays excessively high corporate taxes under the prevailing tax codes, as President would advocate for higher corporate taxes.
Private citizens and corporations seeking to influence lawmakers through legal campaign contributions are not the evildoers. The evildoers are lawmakers who lie to and betray the voters who elected them in exchange for money.
And the Trump supporters are not the people being duped. The ones being duped are the voters who watch a candidate accept huge amounts of money from special interests and yet still expect them to keep their campaign promises.
“Private citizens and corporations seeking to influence lawmakers through legal campaign contributions are not the evildoers.”
Right. But if they do it with Cruz, he’s bought and paid for. If Trump does it with a politician, they aren’t bought and paid for by him.
Up is down and down is up.
You quote my point accurately, agree with it, and then appear to miss it entirely! I’ll try again:
It is not immoral to use LEGAL campaign contributions to support a candidate that will further one’s political interests. In fact, the reason it is legal, is because it is an extension of free speech and indistinguishable from free speech.
Just as being taller, having a louder voice, or owning a microphone or publishing company cannot and should not be outlawed as an unfair political advantage, neither should having more money to contribute to the candidate who will represent one’s interests.
The immorality is introduced when a candidate betrays potential voters by misrepresenting positions or intentions (lies, bears false witness), while promising the opposite to super PAC contributors behind closed doors.
Voters should be wary when a politician is receiving large contributions from sources who have interests in conflict with their own interests.
Neither the donors nor the politicians politicians are doing anything wrong unless they lie about it. Lying is wrong.
If Donald Trump contributed to various politicians hoping to have them on his side, that’s free speech. If the politician secretly promised to serve Trump’s interests by doing one thing, while promising voters the opposite thing, then that’s a lie.
“It is not immoral to use LEGAL campaign contributions to support a candidate that will further one’s political interests.”
I never said it was immoral. I said if Cruz gets these campaign contributions, he’s bought and paid for and we hate him and the corporations that support him. But when Trump did it, we don’t hate that.
Ed
“I said if Cruz gets these campaign contributions, he’s bought and paid for and we hate him and the corporations that support him. But when Trump did it, we don’t hate that.”
You keep repeating this statement, which I don’t agree with, and is the exact opposite of the point I’m making. I don’t hate the corporations that support Cruz (nor do I hate Cruz).
To the extent that I believe Cruz is publicly promising one thing to me as a potential voter, and privately promising the opposite to coporate donors, I would tend to prefer a candidate I trusted more to carry out my wishes.
Cruz’s recent appearance of associations, endorsements and alliances with
establishment, uniparty, open borders,) GOPe types, is giving me the feeling that he has agendas and positions different than those he claims to have on the stump.
I find no fault in those attempting to ‘buy and pay for’ his political influence. I find no fault when Trump attempted to do that as a businessman with politicians in the past. Note that I am being consistent on this issue of contributing to campaigns in hopes of favorable political outcomes. I think it is an extension of free speech. Where I draw the line is when a politician deceives potential voters by publicly promising them one thing and privately guaranteeing wealthy donors the opposite behind closed doors. IF Cruz is doing this, I condemn it. I believe Trump is not doing this because a) he’s not accepting the corporate donor money and b) the wealthy corporate donor class is fighting so desperately to stop him, it is inconceivable he has a secret alliance with them.
I do not KNOW Cruz is untrustworthy, and I do not KNOW Trump is trustworthy. I must make a judgement and I choose to support Trump. The fact that Trump donated to all sorts of politicians in the past is not an issue for me. What matters to me is whether the politician is open and honest about the promises he/she is making to whom in return for what.
I don’t know how to say it any more clearly.
“I find no fault in those attempting to ‘buy and pay for’ his political influence. I find no fault when Trump attempted to do that as a businessman with politicians in the past.”
Instead of writing like 5 paragraphs, you could have just said you support crony capitalism and been done with it.
You are very stubborn when you want to miss a point. I don’t support crony capitalism. The point is (for the fourth time) that I hold the dishonest politician responsible, not the campaign donors.
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.