Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CharlesOConnell

Perhaps this isn’t the time to say this out of respect for Cruz supporters, but I do not see him like I saw Reagan in 1976.

Reagan didn’t turn off a massive part of his party’s electorate in 1976.

Reagan came back, because the party members could easily sign on to him.

Folks need to think about this. I’m not going to state the obvious.


2 posted on 05/04/2016 9:49:00 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (He wins & we do, our nation does, the world does. It's morning in America again. You are living it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DoughtyOne

Agreed.


4 posted on 05/04/2016 9:54:13 AM PDT by Psalm 144 (That giant flushing sound is the New Whirled Order, going down the tubes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

I don’t compare Cruz to Reagan politically because Reagan is the gold sanders when it came to conservative principle and unmatched political skill. Cruz has half of that in my opinion and built a rock solid organization unmatched outside of the Obama structure of 08 and 12. He’s just not the happy, charismatic campaigner. That’s a rare skillset and one that rarely comes out of Harvard Law.

To say Reagan didn’t turn off a massive part of the electorate, it was every bit as polarizing of an election year and things said about Reagan were every bit as demeaning this race. He was hated by many and for the same reasons that he was against the current political class.

They are not the same but there probably haven’t been two more similar in the time since. The difference is a loved charismatic actor vs a smart, high achieving constitutional lawyer. Actors are loved. Lawyers not so much.


7 posted on 05/04/2016 10:01:01 AM PDT by ilgipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

First I am a huge fan of Reagan from way back. I have two signed letters from the Reagan Whitehouse thanking me for my efforts which are framed and among my most valued possessions.

Reagan would not have made the terribly disparaging comments that Cruz did yesterday morning and then drop out in the afternoon. This campaign has provided numerous examples as to why Cruz was and is still so despised by his fellow congress critters. Reagan also wouldn’t have walked across the street to confront and berate American working folks who were protesting at his campaign. I was present during situations similar to this and he did not do it.


10 posted on 05/04/2016 10:06:54 AM PDT by fireman15 (The USA will be toast if the Democrats are able to take the Presidency in 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

Here’s the deal. Republicans decried the fact that the reason they lost the last two POTUS elections (2008/2012) because the “tent” wasn’t big enough. They also “said” we need to be more inclusive and so we can expand the tent. Guess what? Trump has turned out the voters in spite of the fact that he was (and is) up against the Republican party, the media, and 17 other “contenders.” Is that not showing results? That’s the difference between Trump and GOPe. RESULTS! Not only that but he”s wrapped up the nomination, e.g. he has no one left to run against. Can you say seismic shift? Come on!

To your comment regarding Reagan not turning off a massive part of his party, the actual numbers of primary voters don’t lie. He has mobilized a monster. The Republicans in congress need to wake the “F” up and realize what a bird nest on the ground they have. To do anything less, at this point, can only mean one thing. It’s not about winning. It’s about control! Because Trump is not “their guy” they reject his candidacy for fear they won’t be able to manipulate him, or whatever. The thing they should fear is their future ability to keep their “jobs.”

It’s a different game now and they only have themselves to blame. Throw away the old playbook! If you want the job, do the job!!


13 posted on 05/04/2016 10:25:48 AM PDT by t4texas (No koolaid for me. Thanks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

Cruz started well but was unable to stay out of the mire of attacking the other candidates and flinging slurs just like the rest of them. That way is a loser for the candidates with less access to publicity. Reagan did not attack the other candidates and dealt with the Democrat in his debates more effectively with some slightly cornball humor. “There you go again,” perfectly delivered is what finally convinced me that this hopeless dumb Hollywood actor would win and that he had the right stuff.


15 posted on 05/04/2016 10:31:17 AM PDT by arthurus (Het is waar. Tutti i liberali soIg o feccia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne

I don’t disagree with you RR compared to Cruz; but ponder if you will the outcome of the RR election had we had 1: twitter and ‘net blog rooms full of snide teenagers and even more snide self-proclaimed semi-adults; 2: the complete collapse of any sort of moral standards and general life aspiration simul with the elevation of perved out victimhood. 3: The elevation of socialism and SJW-dom as shining models of social conduct.

RR would probably have still won, maybe not by the type of landslide he did.


18 posted on 05/04/2016 10:46:20 AM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (I apologize for not apologizing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson