Trump on Cruz’s “rough temperament”: You can’t call your leaders liars on the Senate floor

[mystery-ak]

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/19/trump-on-cruzs-rough-temperament-you-cant-call-your-leaders-liars-on-the-senate-floor/

Trump on Cruz’s “rough temperament”: You can’t call your leaders liars on the Senate floor
posted at 4:01 pm on January 19, 2016 by Allahpundit

   

Golly, I thought populists liked it when Cruz did that. Now it turns out that type of insolence is a liability in a president. Frankly, that attitude sounds … establishment-y.

I guess it’s time for the “Donald Trump scolding other people for incivility” act of this circus.

    Donald Trump bashed Ted Cruz’s “temperament” and defended his presidential campaign’s ground game during an appearance Tuesday at the John Wayne Birthplace Museum.

    “Ted has got a rough temperament, you can’t call people liars on the Senate floor when they are your leaders. Not a good thing to do if you want to curry favor and get the positive votes later on own,” Trump said.

    “Ted is worried about his temperament, people are talking about his temperament. I haven’t talked about his temperament but he’s got to be careful because his temperament has been questioned a lot.”

continued

[truth_seeker]

Trump is giving young, inexperienced brash Ted a lesson in dealing with others, which is precisely where Cruz comes up short.

If Cruz cannot learn and use that information, he is at the peak of his political career, period, full stop.

[katzenjammer]

LOL

Trump is just using the same techniques that he has time after time.

He planted the "low energy" tag on Jeb! and it stuck (and most everyone here was quite happy with that!).

This one is a two-fold tag: starts the meme (Does Ted have a temperament problem?  Ted has a temper?  and so forth) and also forces Cruz to have to be careful in how he attacks Trump, because he doesn't want to feed the meme.

People may not like it, but it is pretty effective.  Scott Adams speaks of these "linguistic kill shots" and more, interesting point of view:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55NxKENplG4

[Carling]

The most brilliant part of the Trump "narrative" strategy is that the labels attached to him (brash/aggressive/bombastic/etc) are labels that he willingly accepts.

The smart move by Cruz would be to respond pointing out how he was one of a few to stand up against the Obama agenda, how the GOPe leadership did lie, and ask if Trump would not call out liars solely because he may need a vote at a later point.

Embrace it, Ted, and then it can't be used against you.

[aligncare]

You don't become a billionaire without being a bit of a shark, gobbling up everything in your way. It makes one a lot of money in business.

In politics it does something Rushbo talks a lot about, and republicans haven't done in a very long time: defeat the democrats and get our agenda pushed through. Win, baby, win.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Trump is giving young, inexperienced brash Ted a lesson in dealing with others, which is precisely where Cruz comes up short.

If Cruz cannot learn and use that information, he is at the peak of his political career, period, full stop.

Great analysis. 

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I'm starting to like Trump's new found respect for the GOPe.

[ABX]

So the 'because he fights' argument is being replaced by 'because he gets along'?

[Sanguine]

So the 'because he fights' argument is being replaced by 'because he gets along'?

That's it.  He needs to learn the art of the deal.  Cross the aisle, all that stuff.

[truth_seeker]

I'm starting to like Trump's new found respect for the GOPe.

He knows he needs their votes to win.

And unlike many contemporary conservatives, he is playing a higher level game, than to win the "most conservatives' derby.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

He knows he needs their votes to win.

And unlike many contemporary conservatives, he is playing a higher level game, than to win the "most conservatives' derby.

I wish I could say I had any certainty about what is going on. 
Very interesting time to be a fan of politics.  Every day gets weirder and weirder.

[Bigun]

Would someone please inform me as to what someone should call a LIAR if LIAR isn't it?

[Jazzhead]

. Win, baby, win.

No principles,  no morals, just tear things up like a shark.   If that's "conservatism" then it deserves to lose.

 

 



 

[famousdayandyear]

No principles,  no morals, just tear things up like a shark.   If that's "conservatism" then it deserves to lose.

 

I'm sorry.  I missed where the above was suggested.  Can you point to the post that suggested such.  Thanks.

[famousdayandyear]

See aligncare post above.  The comment refers to Trump.

I read the bit about business and "shark".  But did not read any "no principles, no morals" verbage.  I'm guessing that was your extrapolation.
Am I right?  Also, no mention of "Trump".  Interesting how our minds make the necessary jumps to reinforce our narratives.

[truth_seeker]

Would someone please inform me as to what someone should call a LIAR if LIAR isn't it?

Sometimes it is not what one does, but the way they do it.

[libertybele]

I for one have watched Cruz's speech on the Senate floor calling McConnel a liar and explaining the actions of the GOPe and the Washington cartel of which McConnel is a part of, several times. The first time I watched it I was brought to tears.  I was brought to tears because someone had the backbone to tell the American people the TRUTH.  The American people deserve to know what is going on and how corrupt our government really is. 

I find it very sad that Trump feel his crass and sometimes juvenile behavior is acceptable and criticizes Cruz's honest and polished demeanor.

[Right_in_Virginia]

No principles,  no morals, just tear things up like a shark.   If that's "conservatism" then it deserves to lose.

You might want to consider turning down your hyperbole--it works both ways, Jazz.  There are many voters who feel Cruz is doing this claiming he's eligible to be POTUS.

[Bigun]

You might want to consider turning down your hyperbole--it works both ways, Jazz.  There are many voters who feel Cruz is doing this claiming he's eligible to be POTUS.

You might want to consider stopping the practice of labeling everything that someone says that doesn't agree with YOUR opinion as hyperbolic!

I personally find the 

No principles,  no morals, just tear things up like a shark.   If that's "conservatism" then it deserves to lose.

comment to be SPOT ON TARGET!

[Jazzhead]

The difference between Cruz and Trump supporters is the difference between being inspired by truth and integrity,  and being inconvenienced by it. 

When the time comes for me in Pennsylvania,  I won't be voting for either Trump or Cruz.  I prize pragmatism and electability, and both will lose in the fall.   But in Cruz's supporters still beat the hearts of idealists.  Palin cashed in her idealism for good yesterday, accepting Paulie Walnut's amorality and "flexible" positions on the issues as the phony face of the TEA party.   
 

[Jazzhead]

You might want to consider turning down your hyperbole--it works both ways, Jazz.  There are many voters who feel Cruz is doing this claiming he's eligible to be POTUS.

I'm not a Cruz supporter, but he's perfectly eligible to be President.   But I understand how the birthers are now in a pickle - having attacked Obama's qualifications they are now compelled to attach Cruz's,  on pain of looking hypocritical and worse.   

[Sanguine]

The difference between Cruz and Trump supporters is the difference between being inspired by truth and integrity,  and being inconvenienced by it. 

When the time comes for me in Pennsylvania,  I won't be voting for either Trump or Cruz.  I prize pragmatism and electability, and both will lose in the fall.   But in Cruz's supporters still beat the hearts of idealists.  Palin cashed in her idealism for good yesterday, accepting Paulie Walnut's amorality and "flexible" positions on the issues as the phony face of the TEA party.

What?

[libertybele]

The difference between Cruz and Trump supporters is the difference between being inspired by truth and integrity,  and being inconvenienced by it. 

When the time comes for me in Pennsylvania,  I won't be voting for either Trump or Cruz.  I prize pragmatism and electability, and both will lose in the fall.   But in Cruz's supporters still beat the hearts of idealists.  Palin cashed in her idealism for good yesterday, accepting Paulie Walnut's amorality and "flexible" positions on the issues as the phony face of the TEA party.

In my observation, the difference between Cruz and Trump is that Cruz has integrity and Trump says what he needs to say to get elected.  You are of course welcome to vote for your candidate of choice; but I would encourage you to vote for the candidate whom is best suited to be Commander in Chief rather that vote for who you think will win.  IMHO voting for who you think will win is part of the reason we are in the mess that we are in.

I'm not so sure about Palin anymore.  She ran with McCain and now is endorsing Trump, neither of which I feel represent the Tea party.

[Jazzhead]

In my observation, the difference between Cruz and Trump is that Cruz has integrity and Trump says what he needs to say to get elected.  You are of course welcome to vote for your candidate of choice; but I would encourage you to vote for the candidate whom is best suited to be Commander in Chief rather that vote for who you think will win.  IMHO voting for who you think will win is part of the reason we are in the mess that we are in.

I'm not so sure about Palin anymore.  She ran with McCain and now is endorsing Trump, neither of which I feel represent the Tea party.

I have nothing but respect for Cruz supporters,  and agree with your observation concerning the difference between Cruz and Trump.  The willingness of Trump's supporters to overlook his amorality is the biggest mystery of his appeal, IMO. 

If I were a young man,  I'd probably be for Cruz.   I read Goldwater's "The Conscience of a Conservative" when I was 12 years old, and was inspired how AuH20's stand on conservative principles, while unsuccessful,  led 16 years later to the election of Ronald Reagan.   Keep fighting the good fight, LB, and for wanting to do what is right rather than what is easy.   

As for me, in the primary I will support the most conservative candidate who I believe can win.  For me, that's John Kasich.   I don't have 16 years left to take the long view.   I must prioritize pragmatism and electability, or I fear I won't see another GOP President in my lifetime.   

[Sanguine]

I have nothing but respect for Cruz supporters,  and agree with your observation concerning the difference between Cruz and Trump.  The willingness of Trump's supporters to overlook his amorality is the biggest mystery of his appeal, IMO. 

If I were a young man,  I'd probably be for Cruz.   I read Goldwater's "The Conscience of a Conservative" when I was 12 years old, and was inspired how AuH20's stand on conservative principles, while unsuccessful,  led 16 years later to the election of Ronald Reagan.   Keep fighting the good fight, LB, and for wanting to do what is right rather than what is easy.   

As for me, in the primary I will support the most conservative candidate who I believe can win.  For me, that's John Kasich.   I don't have 16 years left to take the long view.   I must prioritize pragmatism and electability, or I fear I won't see another GOP President in my lifetime.

John Kasich?   That's out of left field!

So, I'm curious - what is it about Kasich, given your parameters above, that you feel Kasich represents?