You don't get it. Any distrumpter worth his salt would rather be punched than forgettably escorted out.
What don't I get? I know that those who disrupt Trump (or anyone else for that matter) are mostly low-lifes who want to put the candidate in a bad light and they know that violence works - especialy as it will be highlighted by the MSM and the candidates opponents (whether his fault or not). Cruz tried to leverage what low-lifes and a Trump supporter did, but still escorts such folks out - with a wise-ass remark about how he won't tell someone to punch them/say $h!t if he had a mouthful/Boldly speak the TRUTH about Islam hating us/and some other high-minded things.
I get it.
What you don't get is that when Cruz said that trump bears some blame/responsibility for the violence (as folks do their best to smear him), he decided that being a strict Constitutionalist needed to take a back seat to a perceived opportunity - it also gave credence to Obama saying we bear some responsibility for Islam slaughtering innocents because we might post a cartoon or make some other statement which "makes it understandable" (and made Hilary's ploy about the Benghazi "video" and "understandable plot) because if not debunked, it would have actually been the blame for the massacre there.. That's my real point - instead of saying something like, "I may disagree with what you say (ore how you say it), but I will defend to the death your right to say it", but he opted to forgo that "purism".