Cruz steps into spotlight for Trump

[MACVSOG68]

This was resolved in court in Cruz's favor. 

And, no, outside of the dumbest of the Trumplickers (and that's pretty dumb, given the sample set), no one considers Cruz's citizenship murky.

Well yes, a state court did find Cruz eligible.  But it would have continued to be an issue, valid or not had he been nominated.  But here's the irony in all of this.  The birther movement believed that it took two US citizen parents and birth in the US for a child to be considered a natural born citizen.  Those birthers believed that for the past eight years.  Now the irony.  Many of those same birthers are now solidly Cruz supporters...because they say he's a constitutional conservative.  Yet they don't believe he's even constitutionally eligible for office.   

[bilo]

Cruz was hit with the full-court smear and slander campaign from Trump and fellow travelers, attacking his integrity, his wife, his marital fidelity, claims of 'cheating and stealing delegates' when he was going by the rules, even claiming his father had something to do with the JFK assassination (Just before the NE primaries, even!!) Considering Trump had a LOT of 'free' airtime in the press for his antics, the continuous spew barely let Cruz get a word in edgewise.

Likable? Anyone less would have been burned at the stake.

If the same tactics had been applied to Trump by the media and Cruz supporters, and the 'fix' hadn't been in at the GOPee, he'd be selling pencils out of a tin cup.

 

Sen Cruz will never endorse Trump. He is a man of integrity and the things Trump did in the primaries makes it impossible for Cruz to ever endorse him and go home and look his family in their face.

[Smokin Joe]

One of the issues I've had with the true Trump supporters was their refusal to see his weaknesses.  The same goes for Cruz.  I could see myself voting for Cruz in the future, but he has to make some personal changes in his style and his willingness to work to get things done.  That means negotiation and compromise, something he has demonstrated an inability to do.  Yeah he got hammered by Trump, but he did little to bolster his case that he would or could be a president for all Americans.  But as I've said, he can make some changes and come back.

He didn't get hammered on the issues, not once. It was all vile personal attacks.
The only "weakness" was that he was confronted with an unprecedented level of assault against everyone from himself to his wife to his father, and was, as most any candidate would be, unprepared for such a personal attack. Not on a vote or an issue or a position on policy, but on himself. I remember Au H2O bumper stickers (still have my 'Goldwater dollar'), but I don't ever recall the sort of nastiness the Trump campaign levelled at Cruz (and Cruz supporters).

[MACVSOG68]

He didn't get hammered on the issues, not once. It was all vile personal attacks.
The only "weakness" was that he was confronted with an unprecedented level of assault against everyone from himself to his wife to his father, and was, as most any candidate would be, unprepared for such a personal attack. Not on a vote or an issue or a position on policy, but on himself. I remember Au H2O bumper stickers (still have my 'Goldwater dollar'), but I don't ever recall the sort of nastiness the Trump campaign levelled at Cruz (and Cruz supporters).

Well, for multiple reasons, neither of those two candidates was someone I wanted to see in the general election.  I looked seriously at both, paid little attention to the personal attacks, watched every debate, considered their experience, and their proposals including immigration, taxes, religious issues, foreign policy and domestic spending proposals.  Neither Trump nor Cruz had serious realistic proposals on a number of issues.  Hillary, Trump and Cruz had...and continue to have very low likeability ratings, each because of their own issues, Cruz included.  If he's to be a viable candidate in 2020, he has a lot of growth to accomplish.  He can do it though, and his future will depend on what he accomplishes, not what he stops.

[Smokin Joe]

Well, for multiple reasons, neither of those two candidates was someone I wanted to see in the general election.  I looked seriously at both, paid little attention to the personal attacks, watched every debate, considered their experience, and their proposals including immigration, taxes, religious issues, foreign policy and domestic spending proposals.  Neither Trump nor Cruz had serious realistic proposals on a number of issues.  Hillary, Trump and Cruz had...and continue to have very low likeability ratings, each because of their own issues, Cruz included.  If he's to be a viable candidate in 2020, he has a lot of growth to accomplish.  He can do it though, and his future will depend on what he accomplishes, not what he stops.

You're telling me the "lyin' Ted' Trump twitter mantra, the Carson "stolen votes" smear, the birther bit, The whole someone in his church said he is the annointed of God thing, The Heidi is a Globalist banker tool who wrote the whole NAFTA thing, things, The five mistresses tabloid and allegedly two more (went away after one issue), the 'Heidi had a breakdown' bit, the 'stole' delegates in Colorado smear, the Dad killed JFK bit, etfrickingcetera had no effect? You just judged him on his SCOTUS briefs and time as an attorney and a Senator and the few campaign statements he could squeeze in edgewise?
Did you perchance notice the attack waves seemed timed for greatest proximity to a primary and/or caucus where that particular topic might have greatest effect?
I'm not impugning your ability to sift data, just saying it would be difficult to really sift through that intense dross and get to what Cruz actually said.
I had no qualms about his SCOTUS pick(s), given the opportunity.
The whole "unlikable" meme was based on him sticking to principle in the Senate, in opposition to the pandering to Obama of the GOPe, which as the crowing lie, he was supposedly a member in good standing.  And, to be truthful, I would not be voting for Miss Popularity, but someone whose political stance agreed with my own and who had the grit to fight for that. Considering the people he was unpopular with (Boehner, et al), I find that to be a plus.

YMMV.

Maybe next time, but with the knack the GOP has for pulling defeat from the jaws of victory, I'm not so sure.

[guitar4jesus]

You're telling me the "lyin' Ted' Trump twitter mantra, the Carson "stolen votes" smear, the birther bit, The whole someone in his church said he is the annointed of God thing, The Heidi is a Globalist banker tool who wrote the whole NAFTA thing, things, The five mistresses tabloid and allegedly two more (went away after one issue), the 'Heidi had a breakdown' bit, the 'stole' delegates in Colorado smear, the Dad killed JFK bit, etfrickingcetera had no effect? You just judged him on his SCOTUS briefs and time as an attorney and a Senator and the few campaign statements he could squeeze in edgewise?
Did you perchance notice the attack waves seemed timed for greatest proximity to a primary and/or caucus where that particular topic might have greatest effect?
I'm not impugning your ability to sift data, just saying it would be difficult to really sift through that intense dross and get to what Cruz actually said.
I had no qualms about his SCOTUS pick(s), given the opportunity.
The whole "unlikable" meme was based on him sticking to principle in the Senate, in opposition to the pandering to Obama of the GOPe, which as the crowing lie, he was supposedly a member in good standing.  And, to be truthful, I would not be voting for Miss Popularity, but someone whose political stance agreed with my own and who had the grit to fight for that. Considering the people he was unpopular with (Boehner, et al), I find that to be a plus.

YMMV.

Maybe next time, but with the knack the GOP has for pulling defeat from the jaws of victory, I'm not so sure.

 

[MACVSOG68]

You're telling me the "lyin' Ted' Trump twitter mantra, the Carson "stolen votes" smear, the birther bit, The whole someone in his church said he is the annointed of God thing, The Heidi is a Globalist banker tool who wrote the whole NAFTA thing, things, The five mistresses tabloid and allegedly two more (went away after one issue), the 'Heidi had a breakdown' bit, the 'stole' delegates in Colorado smear, the Dad killed JFK bit, etfrickingcetera had no effect? You just judged him on his SCOTUS briefs and time as an attorney and a Senator and the few campaign statements he could squeeze in edgewise?
Did you perchance notice the attack waves seemed timed for greatest proximity to a primary and/or caucus where that particular topic might have greatest effect?
I'm not impugning your ability to sift data, just saying it would be difficult to really sift through that intense dross and get to what Cruz actually said.
I had no qualms about his SCOTUS pick(s), given the opportunity.
The whole "unlikable" meme was based on him sticking to principle in the Senate, in opposition to the pandering to Obama of the GOPe, which as the crowing lie, he was supposedly a member in good standing.  And, to be truthful, I would not be voting for Miss Popularity, but someone whose political stance agreed with my own and who had the grit to fight for that. Considering the people he was unpopular with (Boehner, et al), I find that to be a plus.

YMMV.

Maybe next time, but with the knack the GOP has for pulling defeat from the jaws of victory, I'm not so sure.

No, I paid little attention to attacks on Cruz, and more to the attacks on Trump.  Toward the end of the primaries, Cruz went up to a Trump supporter and actually debated him.  I was impressed with that.  You and I obviously looked at him from a different point of view.  I have little regard for someone who simply takes an untenable position for no other purpose than to stop all legislation for as long as he can stand up.  If you want to believe Cruz has no weaknesses, fine.  Then perhaps you can understand the Trump supporters who refuse to admit to any of his shortcomings.  My first commander-in-chief in the military was Eisenhower, so after all those elections, and after JFK, I'm a tad jaded about any candidate that people put on pedestals.  And yes, I did consider the positions of Trump, Cruz, Kasich, Bush, and Rubio.  The rest I blew off as either no chance or personal dislike such as Christie, Paul and Carson.  Fiorina...well, lots of one liners, but little depth.  Rubio and Cruz will be around next time for sure.  Each needs to do some patching up and Cruz needs to demonstrate broader appeal than to just his RR wing.

[skeeter]

You're telling me the "lyin' Ted' Trump twitter mantra, the Carson "stolen votes" smear, the birther bit, The whole someone in his church said he is the annointed of God thing, The Heidi is a Globalist banker tool who wrote the whole NAFTA thing, things, The five mistresses tabloid and allegedly two more (went away after one issue), the 'Heidi had a breakdown' bit, the 'stole' delegates in Colorado smear, the Dad killed JFK bit, etfrickingcetera had no effect? You just judged him on his SCOTUS briefs and time as an attorney and a Senator and the few campaign statements he could squeeze in edgewise?
Did you perchance notice the attack waves seemed timed for greatest proximity to a primary and/or caucus where that particular topic might have greatest effect?
I'm not impugning your ability to sift data, just saying it would be difficult to really sift through that intense dross and get to what Cruz actually said.
I had no qualms about his SCOTUS pick(s), given the opportunity.
The whole "unlikable" meme was based on him sticking to principle in the Senate, in opposition to the pandering to Obama of the GOPe, which as the crowing lie, he was supposedly a member in good standing.  And, to be truthful, I would not be voting for Miss Popularity, but someone whose political stance agreed with my own and who had the grit to fight for that. Considering the people he was unpopular with (Boehner, et al), I find that to be a plus.

YMMV.

Maybe next time, but with the knack the GOP has for pulling defeat from the jaws of victory, I'm not so sure.

Excellent post.

Cruz is no saint. But what an improvement over what we ended up with would he have been.

[youknowwho]

He didn't get hammered on the issues, not once. It was all vile personal attacks.
The only "weakness" was that he was confronted with an unprecedented level of assault against everyone from himself to his wife to his father, and was, as most any candidate would be, unprepared for such a personal attack. Not on a vote or an issue or a position on policy, but on himself. I remember Au H2O bumper stickers (still have my 'Goldwater dollar'), but I don't ever recall the sort of nastiness the Trump campaign levelled at Cruz (and Cruz supporters).

Boom.  Nailed it. 

[Smokin Joe]

No, I paid little attention to attacks on Cruz, and more to the attacks on Trump.  Toward the end of the primaries, Cruz went up to a Trump supporter and actually debated him.  I was impressed with that.  You and I obviously looked at him from a different point of view.  I have little regard for someone who simply takes an untenable position for no other purpose than to stop all legislation for as long as he can stand up.  If you want to believe Cruz has no weaknesses, fine.  Then perhaps you can understand the Trump supporters who refuse to admit to any of his shortcomings.  My first commander-in-chief in the military was Eisenhower, so after all those elections, and after JFK, I'm a tad jaded about any candidate that people put on pedestals.  And yes, I did consider the positions of Trump, Cruz, Kasich, Bush, and Rubio.  The rest I blew off as either no chance or personal dislike such as Christie, Paul and Carson.  Fiorina...well, lots of one liners, but little depth.  Rubio and Cruz will be around next time for sure.  Each needs to do some patching up and Cruz needs to demonstrate broader appeal than to just his RR wing.

I never said Cruz was perfect. Just a lot closer than what we got.

Many of the "attacks" on Trump were attacking his attacks on others.

And I looked at the "outsider" Trump finding there was a lot more to dislike there than to like, from his dealings in the Kelo fight (trying to hire the woman's attorney), to his business dealings not being quite the shiny 'winner' he was presented as, and other things there is no need to belabor. I found the image was a lot shinier than the man, but it seemed people were going nuts for the image. Most of that I posted on TOS, before it became a capital offense.

I will accept you at your word that those things had no effect (just checking) despite the veritable sh*tstorm of poo thrown at Cruz.

Aside from not being a fan of the filibuster, what do you see as the areas Cruz needs to refine?

[MACVSOG68]

I never said Cruz was perfect. Just a lot closer than what we got.

Many of the "attacks" on Trump were attacking his attacks on others.

And I looked at the "outsider" Trump finding there was a lot more to dislike there than to like, from his dealings in the Kelo fight (trying to hire the woman's attorney), to his business dealings not being quite the shiny 'winner' he was presented as, and other things there is no need to belabor. I found the image was a lot shinier than the man, but it seemed people were going nuts for the image. Most of that I posted on TOS, before it became a capital offense.

I will accept you at your word that those things had no effect (just checking) despite the veritable sh*tstorm of poo thrown at Cruz.

Aside from not being a fan of the filibuster, what do you see as the areas Cruz needs to refine?

I would like to see him demonstrate that he could actually sit down with the other side and negotiate, understanding that it's not a one way street.  I would like to see him put forward some issues that have a chance in any kind of congress.  He's not going to get rid of half the departments including the IRS.  Sounds great, but has no possible chance, especially given his desire to have two tax codes, including an income tax (no matter how small) and a consumption tax.  Congress would love such powers.  He's not going to bring the US back 100 years in terms of his view of moral certainties.  We'll see how his speech goes, but I sense he would love an opportunity to get a SCOTUS seat.  There he doesn't have to change his personality.

[libertybele]

Actually, I hope Cruz announces his intention to run as an Independent, and then walks out.

It was reported that in his speech he was going to thank his delegates.  He was stripped of his delegates and they were given to Trump, so I don't see that happening.  I really think he would be better off skipping the convention all together.  If he even remotely is seen as endorsing Trump his career is over; not that it really matters anymore as the GOP just died. 

[Fantom]

It was reported that in his speech he was going to thank his delegates.  He was stripped of his delegates and they were given to Trump, so I don't see that happening.  I really think he would be better off skipping the convention all together.  If he even remotely is seen as endorsing Trump his career is over; not that it really matters anymore as the GOP just died.

Not for me is Teds career over.

Teds delegates being stolen by trump/GOPE is not a poor reflection on those delegates.

Let Ted speak. It is the only Speach I will watch.

Oh, and after what went on. I absolutely will not be voting for trump/GOPE. It is settling to come to a decision.

[libertybele]

I saw him as the best last hope for this once great nation but that's over with now. After 4 years of Hillary there won't be anything left to save!

People don't seem to be understanding the magnitude of what just happened. After 4 years of Hillary we won't have a country left.  The Constitution will be irrelevant, the Bill of Rights gutted, millions of new liberal voters will emerge due to amnesty and ISIS will be in a neighborhood nearby.  It is over. The GOP died and we no longer have a two party system, nor a democracy within a Republic.

I am anticipating that Cruz will cancel and not show up at the Convention.

[MACVSOG68]

People don't seem to be understanding the magnitude of what just happened. After 4 years of Hillary we won't have a country left.  The Constitution will be irrelevant, the Bill of Rights gutted, millions of new liberal voters will emerge due to amnesty and ISIS will be in a neighborhood nearby.  It is over. 

And this is a good reason to not for the GOP...how?

[Bigun]

People don't seem to be understanding the magnitude of what just happened.

You can say that again!  They are completely in the dark for the most part!

After 4 years of Hillary we won't have a country left.  The Constitution will be irrelevant, the Bill of Rights gutted, millions of new liberal voters will emerge due to amnesty and ISIS will be in a neighborhood nearby.  It is over. The GOP died and we no longer have a two party system, nor a democracy within a Republic.

I am anticipating that Cruz will cancel and not show up at the Convention.

Or Trump! Doesn't matter at all!

[libertybele]

And this is a good reason to not for the GOP...how?

Trump's objective has always been to give the reigns to his pal Hillary.  In the unlikely event that Trump is president the outcome will be no different. 

[jmyrlefuller]

Trump's objective has always been to give the reigns to his pal Hillary.  In the unlikely event that Trump is president the outcome will be no different.

I don't know about that.

I truly think the guy's torn at this point. On one hand, all the Presidency entails and all of its responsibility is probably something he doesn't want to do, and he might just be willing to hand it off to Hillary.

On the other... he always has had a 'yuge' ego... and think of the power (especially after the Obama era). Think of the access to very expensive Washington, DC real estate. Think of the title of 'leader of the free world.' Think of the millions of loyal sycophants who actually wanted this guy in office. He has so much to personally gain by actually serving, and he joins an elite club (we all know how much he loves elite).

I think he just might want to win now.

[MACVSOG68]

Trump's objective has always been to give the reigns to his pal Hillary.  In the unlikely event that Trump is president the outcome will be no different.

And you have any evidence of this...where?

[GrouchoTex]

Cruz will do fine tomorrow. He will do what Christie is doing now. Hammer Hillary.He will talk about the constitution and conservativism.
He is a legal scholar, he doesn't want Hillary Stacking the courts.

[MACVSOG68]

Cruz will do fine tomorrow. He will do what Christie is doing now. Hammer Hillary.He will talk about the constitution and conservativism.
He is a legal scholar, he doesn't want Hillary Stacking the courts.

I wouldn't compare Cruz to Christie.  Cruz does have a moral compass; Christie none.  Cruz can do a lot for himself tomorrow to rehabilitate his image for 2020. Christie  IMHO cannot.

[libertybele]

And you have any evidence of this...where?

Proof?  Do you need anymore proof than what just happened these past couple of days at the convention, or actually what has happened throughout this entire primary process?? Perhaps you and I have been observing two different primaries or reading about two different conventions.

[rodamala]

Trump's objective has always been to give the reigns to his pal Hillary.  In the unlikely event that Trump is president the outcome will be no different.

+1

[MACVSOG68]

Proof?  Do you need anymore proof than what just happened these past couple of days at the convention, or actually what has happened throughout this entire primary process?? Perhaps you and I have been observing two different primaries or reading about two different conventions.

Well...yeah, I could use a tiny tad of evidence that Trump is going to turn it all over to Hillary.  I've seen nothing in the primary process indicating anything other than that Trump will do whatever is necessary to win.  How does that support your thesis that he's in this to give it to Hillary if elected?

[Bigun]