Taking Ted Cruz Seriously

[GtHawk]

Word.  And...Trump fans still do.

When the candidate you support almost daily makes embarrassing statements, you must deflect, deflect, deflect. And face it they are so invested in their new potential Lord Foul(because he too believes that he should be able to rule by fiat) that even if they realize how unstable their choice has proven to be, they won't endure the embarrassment of renouncing him. They continue to argue that the potential of the unknown is a better option than the  we know, while many of us recognize that both are just different faces of the same  and say  I will not  surrender!
@Cyber Liberty

[bolobaby]

And why Trump supporters insist that Cruz intended his statement to mean otherwise is beyond me.

This is why Team Trump is Team Buffoon. A savvy team would have immediately said that Ted was talking about them right after the speech and left it at that. Instead The (D)onald decided to bring up Oswald again.

So, actually, Laura - no, it's doesn't mean what you think it means.

[Cyber Liberty]

This is why Team Trump is Team Buffoon. A savvy team would have immediately said that Ted was talking about them right after the speech and left it at that. Instead The (D)onald decided to bring up Oswald again.

My wife's a Trump fan, and I told her that's exactly what I thought Cruz meant by "Vote your conscience."  Why Trump fans would think he meant anything other than that is a deep mystery to me, because a few are professional politicians, who know the art of the spin better than anybody.

Cruz gave Trump an opening to declare it an endorsement, and why he and his fans didn't leaves me deeply confused about his instincts.  Are they really that bad?  People who should know better jumped right off that cliff with him.

[catfish1957]

My wife's a Trump fan, and I told her that's exactly what I thought Cruz meant by "Vote your conscience."  Why Trump fans would think he meant anything other than that is a deep mystery to me, because a few are professional politicians, who know the art of the spin better than anybody.

Cruz gave Trump an opening to declare it an endorsement, and why he and his fans didn't leaves me deeply confused about his instincts.  Are they really that bad?  People who should know better jumped right off that cliff with him.

Wouldn't it be a hoot if Cruz just happened to show up at the first debate, and sit on the first row.  Then watch Trump's reaction.... Talk about blow is train of thought.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

And why Trump supporters insist that Cruz intended his statement to mean otherwise is beyond me.

Well, a lot of Cruz supporters themselves clearly interpreted his statement as being anti-Trump because they defended it as such.  I read a ton of comments here and elsewhere praising Cruz for "not caving into Trump", or justifying his comments by saying "why should he endorse a guy who insulted his wife and father", etc..  Personally, I think the latter argument is a pretty solid justification for him not to endorse Trump, but the point remains that it is revisionism to now try to recharacterize his statement as intended to be an endorsement of Trump.

[Cyber Liberty]

Well, a lot of Cruz supporters themselves clearly interpreted his statement as being anti-Trump because they defended it as such.  I read a ton of comments here and elsewhere praising Cruz for "not caving into Trump", or justifying his comments by saying "why should he endorse a guy who insulted his wife and father", etc..  Personally, I think the latter argument is a pretty solid justification for him not to endorse Trump, but the point remains that it is revisionism to now try to recharacterize his statement as intended to be an endorsement of Trump.

It wasn't an endorsement, which Cruz did for his own reasons (he wants to be reelected in two years).  My point was, why didn't Trump's people spin it as if it were?  Nobody cared what Cruz's people thought so that's a non-issue, and the spin would have worked.  Now is too late, I agree, but it could have been handled better at the time by the Trump people.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

My wife's a Trump fan, and I told her that's exactly what I thought Cruz meant by "Vote your conscience."  Why Trump fans would think he meant anything other than that is a deep mystery to me, because a few are professional politicians, who know the art of the spin better than anybody.

Cruz gave Trump an opening to declare it an endorsement, and why he and his fans didn't leaves me deeply confused about his instincts.  Are they really that bad?  People who should know better jumped right off that cliff with him.

 

Wow -- that's some revisionism you've got going there.  So Cruz really intended it as an endorsement, just without naming Trump himself?  The widely-discussed debate over the so-called "conscience clause" was about whether delegates committed to Trump would be permitted to not vote for Trump anyway.  So in the context of the Convention, and given Cruz's inflections, it was pretty clear to most that by referring repeatedly to "conscience", Cruz was trying to discourage votes for Trump.

A source close to Cruz said the senator wasn't shocked by the mood after the speech.  "He expected people to not approve," the source said. "Not surprised at the reaction."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/20/politics/ted-cruz-republican-convention-moment/index.html

And then there were his comments the next morning to his own constituents, some of whom were angered at his speech:

"That pledge was not a blanket commitment that if you go and slander and attack Heidi, that I'm going to nonetheless come like a servile puppy dog and say thank you very much for maligning my wife and maligning my father," Cruz told members of the Texas delegation Thursday morning. Heidi is the senator's wife.

""This isn't a team sport," Cruz said at one point. "You don't just put on red jerseys and blue jerseys and say 'yay!' This is about principles."

"I'm not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my father," Cruz said as applause built.'

Does that sound like a guy who intended that listeners take his speech as support for Trump?

To be clear, I'm not saying that he should have endorsed Trump.  Given his decision not to endorse the nominee, I think the right thing to do would have been to decline a speaking slot period.  But in any case, trying to argue now that Cruz really kinda sorts didendorse Trump is standing reality on its head.

[skeeter]

Well, a lot of Cruz supporters themselves clearly interpreted his statement as being anti-Trump because they defended it as such.  I read a ton of comments here and elsewhere praising Cruz for "not caving into Trump", or justifying his comments by saying "why should he endorse a guy who insulted his wife and father", etc..  Personally, I think the latter argument is a pretty solid justification for him not to endorse Trump, but the point remains that it is revisionism to now try to recharacterize his statement as intended to be an endorsement of Trump.

I see no contradiction in the view that Cruz didn't compromise himself by bowing to Trump but instead leaving a generic endorsement on the table that Trump, with some effort, could claim.

It was a hanger Trump should've knocked out of the park.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I see no contradiction in the view that Cruz didn't compromise himself by bowing to Trump but instead leaving a generic endorsement on the table that Trump, with some effort, could claim.

It was a hanger Trump should've knocked out of the park.

Read my response above to another poster.  It was very clear from the context of "conscience" at the Convention, and from Cruz' own words afterwards, that he did not intend his statement to be taking the way you are implying.

[skeeter]

Read my response above to another poster.  It was very clear from the context of "conscience" at the Convention, and from Cruz' own words afterwards, that he did not intend his statement to be taking the way you are implying.

I read it, and do not agree. Many here, including myself, heard Cruz's comments and were back here the day after wondering if Trump would respond in that manner. Turned out he chose not to.

In spite of the pundits and nameless sources, its really a matter for personal interpretation. It was always clear to me what Cruz was attempting.

[Just_Victor]

Well, a lot of Cruz supporters themselves clearly interpreted his statement as being anti-Trump because they defended it as such.  I read a ton of comments here and elsewhere praising Cruz for "not caving into Trump", or justifying his comments by saying "why should he endorse a guy who insulted his wife and father", etc..  Personally, I think the latter argument is a pretty solid justification for him not to endorse Trump, but the point remains that it is revisionism to now try to recharacterize his statement as intended to be an endorsement of Trump.

It wasn't intended to be an endorsement.  It's clear that Cruz had no desire to personally endorse Trump.  But neither was it intended to be the opposite.  The statement isn't being recharacterized, I'm just looking at what he actually said.

[Cyber Liberty]

 

Wow -- that's some revisionism you've got going there.  So Cruz really intended it as an endorsement, just without naming Trump himself?  The widely-discussed debate over the so-called "conscience clause" was about whether delegates committed to Trump would be permitted to not vote for Trump anyway.  So in the context of the Convention, and given Cruz's inflections, it was pretty clear to most that by referring repeatedly to "conscience", Cruz was trying to discourage votes for Trump.

A source close to Cruz said the senator wasn't shocked by the mood after the speech.  "He expected people to not approve," the source said. "Not surprised at the reaction."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/20/politics/ted-cruz-republican-convention-moment/index.html

And then there were his comments the next morning to his own constituents, some of whom were angered at his speech:

"That pledge was not a blanket commitment that if you go and slander and attack Heidi, that I'm going to nonetheless come like a servile puppy dog and say thank you very much for maligning my wife and maligning my father," Cruz told members of the Texas delegation Thursday morning. Heidi is the senator's wife.

""This isn't a team sport," Cruz said at one point. "You don't just put on red jerseys and blue jerseys and say 'yay!' This is about principles."

"I'm not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my father," Cruz said as applause built.'

Does that sound like a guy who intended that listeners take his speech as support for Trump?

To be clear, I'm not saying that he should have endorsed Trump.  Given his decision not to endorse the nominee, I think the right thing to do would have been to decline a speaking slot period.  But in any case, trying to argue now that Cruz really kinda sorts didendorse Trump is standing reality on its head.

Me, in the post immediately before this post TO me:

Now is too late, I agree, but it could have been handled better at the time by the Trump people.

I just agreed with your central point.

[skeeter]

It wasn't intended to be an endorsement.  It's clear that Cruz had no desire to personally endorse Trump.  But neither was it intended to be the opposite.  The statement isn't being recharacterized, I'm just looking at what he actually said.

If Trump had made an attempt to claim to be the candidate of conscious in his acceptance speech the critics would now be looking at Cruz's statement in a completely different light.

[EtX]

If Trump had made an attempt to claim to be the candidate of conscious in his acceptance speech the critics would now be looking at Cruz's statement in a completely different light.

It was impossible for trump to accept even a crumb from Cruz. Trump had become too engulfed in his egomania trying to rationalize the public's view of his unnecessary personal nastinesses not only toward Cruz.

[Cyber Liberty]

If Trump had made an attempt to claim to be the candidate of conscious in his acceptance speech the critics would now be looking at Cruz's statement in a completely different light.

It was impossible for trump to accept even a crumb from Cruz. Trump had become too engulfed in his egomania trying to rationalize the public's view of his unnecessary personal nastinesses not only toward Cruz.

You are both correct.  And Trump's fans continue to smear Cruz long after their hero left the playing field.  Meanwhile, Cruz has other fish to fry.  He's up for a difficult reelection in a couple years, and Trump's lust for power has damaged him considerably.