Ted Cruz Says Donald Trump Is to Blame for Violence at His Rallies

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said on Friday that Donald J. Trump bore responsibility for “creating an environment” that encourages violence at his events.

Speaking to reporters at a local Republican dinner outside Chicago, where Mr. Trump had just canceled a rally amid fierce confrontations between his supporters and protesters, Mr. Cruz began by saying that the “protesters who took violence into their own hands” were responsible for the episode.

“But in any campaign, responsibility starts at the top,” Mr. Cruz continued. “And when you have a campaign that disrespects the voters, when you have a campaign that affirmatively encourages violence, when you have a campaign that is facing allegations of physical violence against members of the press, you create an environment that only encourages this sort of nasty discourse.”

Mr. Cruz invoked the protests and violent police run-ins at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, and predicted that future skirmishes were likely.

“When the candidate urges supporters to engage in physical violence, to punch people in the face, the predictable consequence of that is that it escalates,” Mr. Cruz said. “And today is unlikely to be the last such instance.”

YOU are 1000% CORRECT!!!!!!!!!!

The rest of the hypocrites are trying to turn this around.

That's ok, it's flushing out all the hypocrites who say they believe in the "Constitution".

SADLY, Cruz has unmasked himself to be nothing more than a POLITICAL OPPORTUNIST, who's been using all the rhetoric about "the CONSTITUTION" purely for POLITICAL POSTURING and 'vote getting' strictly for the advancement of his own political career!

The blame Trump should be and is responsible for is indirect but he can use for both for advantage and for the good of the country.

His rhetoric e.g. sometimes dipping into crude & rude

His policies e.g. sometimes divisive - ban muslim refugees

Has indeed created an environment, (a lightening rod) for such protests.

I don’t believe Trumps critics have been blaming him personally or directly.

However Trump has an opportunity to be presidential, seize the moment and try to unite, no longer divide.

If Trump succeeds in that he wins.

Race card: Didn’t work.

Elitisim card: Didn’t work.

Race card (v2): Didn’t work.

Race card (v3): Didn’t work.

Hitler card (v1-v4): Didn’t work.

Hate card (v1): Didn’t work.

Hate card (v2): Undetermined...

Anything and everything to avoid talking about issues.

Bottom line, anyone interested in electing a president will support Cruz.
Anyone interested in electing a cult leader, will hand 45 states to the left.
Your choice.

You don't get it do you? You yammer away about 'cults' and fail to recognize that it is the Cruz campaign that fits the very definition of a cult. Here consider this astute analysis of where Cruz went wrong:

"Rush let the cat out of the bag this morning regarding Cruz’ sure-fire strategy that he had planned out for winning the presidency.

Apparently, Cruz had lunch with Rush a couple two or three years ago where Cruz explained his plan. He figured that Romney lost in 2012 because five to six million evangelicals stayed home. So, Cruz figures he already has the conservative vote naturally locked-in, and can take the tea party and non-establishment vote, and the rest of the Republicans (even the establishment) have nowhere else to go, so all he has to do to win it is snare the evangelicals. Thus he comes out with a campaign custom tailored to woo and win the evangelical vote.

And it may have worked like a charm had Trump not exploded on the scene with a bold plan to build the wall, enforce the law, deport them all, secure the nation, Repeal Obamacare, straighten out the trade deals that have devastated our manufacturing industry and jobs, cut taxes with a Reaganesque tax plan, rebuild the economy, bring manufacturing, capital and jobs back, rebuild the military and make America great again. And as a last minute bonus, Trump throws in slapping a moratorium on Muslim immigration.

Surprise! It caught on like wildfire. But Cruz was not concerned. He continued on nonchalantly, smug in the knowledge that the evangelicals would never support Trump and that his plan was sure to lock them in. All Cruz had to do was lay low and wait for Trump to implode.

But something went wrong. Evangelicals (and other demographic groups you might think would never support a guy like Trump) are flocking to Trump like crazy. Cruz can’t figure it out. The consultants can’t figure it out. The media, the pundits, the democrats, the establishment—no one can figure it out.

Rush explains that like all demographic groups, evangelicals are not monolithic single issue voters. Not even on abortion.

It turns out that evangelicals are also concerned about securing the borders, rebuilding the economy, bringing back manufacturing and jobs, cutting taxes, cutting spending, cutting government, building a strong military and (not surprisingly) taking a tough stand against Muslims who are chopping the heads off Christians.

Rush may not have directly said it, but I believe he may be thinking that Cruz blew it trying such a narrowly focused campaign."

107 posted on 3/9/2016, 9:19:04 PM by Jim Robinson

Excerpted from:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3407166/posts?page=107#107

Trump has never “suppressed his opposition through violence.” All of his rallies have areas for protestors to express whatever they want to their hearts’ content. He rents the venues themselves, however, to hold rallies for his supporters. There is an announcement before each of his rallies that protestors will be escorted out and that no one should harm them. Protestors are trespassing on a private event paid for personally by Trump. If you won’t let Black Lives Matter folks protest in your home, does that mean you are suppressing people with opposing views or simply that they have chosen an illegal place to protest?

Beyond that, the first “martyr” protestor from the Birmingham rally last year, admitted in an interview I read that he punched a Trump supporter in the face. Then, as we see on the video, he struggled like crazy when the cops tried to lead him out. You want us to interpret that brawl as violence against him alone. I will admit, there is evidence that one woman was pushed and one young man was punched by an almost 80-year-old man.

It is interesting that you would see those two isolated incidents involving an infinitesimal fraction of Trump’s total rally audience members as just as bad as thousands of radical leftists stopping a presidential candidate from exercising his free speech rights, not to mention the two protestors who were caught on film taking swings at Trump supporters or the one who gashed a cop’s head with a glass bottle. An interesting moral equivalence.

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.