WOW! POLITICAL SUICIDE! TED CRUZ REFUSES TO ENDORSE TRUMP – CROWD BOOS HIM OFF STAGE

[aligncare]

Over 50%.  That's why he won the nomination.

Then why couldn't that 65% of the party nominate a conservative in the primary?  Even after Cruz was the only conservative in the race, he still wasn't close to 50%.  Why not?  Honestly, I can't get passed this argument.  If true conservatives really are the 'silent majority", then why hasn't the GOP nominated a true conservative since 1984?  There either 1) aren't as many conservatives as we think, or 2) the definition of "conservative" varies so much depending on who you ask that calling someone a "conservative" is meaningless.

Yes. A reasonable argument. You're correct in your question.

Odds are that an extreme candidate on either ideological pole would have trouble getting elected president. --unless they're an 'historic' democrat of color, of course.

But, it seems Donald Trump has managed to corral the great middle of American politics -- whatever their ideological beliefs. I think people see him as a fixer. Someone who can get the deal done for the American people -- not just a subset of them.

[aligncare]

...I guess this is where I get attacked and insulted for having that opinion...

[Smokin Joe]

...I guess this is where I get attacked and insulted for having that opinion...

I won't attack that opinion. In large measure it is correct, in that Trump has raised a blank slate and thrown in a couple of hot button terms and let people write their own glorious solutions for all their ills on that blank slate, believing he will implement them.

It worked with Obama, too.

[aligncare]

I won't attack that opinion. In large measure it is correct, in that Trump has raised a blank slate and thrown in a couple of hot button terms and let people write their own glorious solutions for all their ills on that blank slate, believing he will implement them.

It worked with Obama, too.

I remember thinking how moderate Obama sounded in his stump speeches. I suspected he was much less moderate in practice. Eight years later – well, that's history.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Maybe it is. But don't expect me to vote for the charisma without the conservative philosophy. All hat and no cattle will not make America great again.

Oh, I'm not suggesting that at all.  My point goes more to those who think the problem is the lack of a third party.  The problem is more mundane than that -- it's the lack of the right candidate.

[Smokin Joe]

Oh, I'm not suggesting that at all.  My point goes more to those who think the problem is the lack of a third party.  The problem is more mundane than that -- it's the lack of the right candidate.

Actually, it is a question of match up and timing. I have little doubt that sans Trump, Cruz would have been resoundingly nominated. Without Trump's smear campaign against Cruz, he would have taken the nomination handily, and the rest of the field would have done about the same they did, with a few more people. But Trump appealed to the Angry Party, ironically, angry because the GOPe had not done its job and ticked off the same electorate that put Trump snugly in bed with them.

Plus ca change, plus ca meme chose.

With that in mind, the desired result of those voting on principle will not be achieved by repeatedly tilting at the GOP windmill.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Why? Is it not obvious? Has it not been demonstrated election after election?

You have a mere handful of people,left in America, with enough honesty to live by the words they speak. You have a mere handful of people that lack a wide yellow stripe down their back. You have a mere handful of people that are not every bit as liberal as the average democrat.

In the off season, everyone on the right is a 'conservative'. But come election season, the truth comes out and the overwhelming majority of 'the right' is as hard left as their opposition. Lets face it. They knowingly and willingly tried to elect a guy that profits from the abortions his own laws enabled last time. Electing a mere con man is nothing by comparison.

Why should ANYONE think such people would EVER stand up for conservative principles or actual Conservatives when it actually matters? They REPEATEDLY show how low their character is and never EVER admit liberalism, as demonstrated by their votes, is what they desire.

If they did not want liberals, they would not VOTE for liberals.

Period.

I don't disagree with any of that -- we actually agree.  I was addressing those who believe there is some "silent majority" out there just waiting to rally behind some new, conservative party.  That silent majority does not exist.  The claimed majority/near majority of conservatives doesn't exist when you start breaking it down issue by issue, and there is in fact significant disagreement on what a "conservative" actually is.  If you broaden the definition enough to get anywhere near 40% or so, you've lost some people who will consider that person "no longer a conservative".

[skeeter]

Snow jobs instead of Obama's no jobs and Bill Clinton's blow..............Ok bumper stickers are not my forte.

Not bad...

[Smokin Joe]

I don't disagree with any of that -- we actually agree.  I was addressing those who believe there is some "silent majority" out there just waiting to rally behind some new, conservative party.  That silent majority does not exist.  The claimed majority/near majority of conservatives doesn't exist when you start breaking it down issue by issue, and there is in fact significant disagreement on what a "conservative" actually is.  If you broaden the definition enough to get anywhere near 40% or so, you've lost some people who will consider that person "no longer a conservative".

Tell me, then, what more conservative stance would you find to be a deal-breaker in a match-up between a consummate Conservative and a Liberal like Hillary or Bernie? What would keep you from voting for someone more conservative than some 'ideal' more moderate candidate?

[Bigun]

Oh, I'm not suggesting that at all.  My point goes more to those who think the problem is the lack of a third party.  The problem is more mundane than that -- it's the lack of the right candidate.

Nope! It's the lack of a second party!

[DB]

Regarding the brilliant deal maker Trump, all had to say after Cruz's speech was, "wow, great speech, vote your conscience, vote for me, I'll bring back the constitution". But he was incapable of doing so. It is kiss my ring or die. That isn't leadership and it isn't brilliant. It's deadly.

[sneakypete]

Yes. A reasonable argument. You're correct in your question.

Odds are that an extreme candidate on either ideological pole would have trouble getting elected president. --unless they're an 'historic' democrat of color, of course.

@aligncare

A left-handed cross-eyed cross-dressing half-Eskimo and half-black lesbian transvestite with a speech impediment that weighed 350 lbs would pretty much have a lock on the candidacy for either branch of the ruling party.   

[INVAR]

Why? Is it not obvious? Has it not been demonstrated election after election?

You have a mere handful of people,left in America, with enough honesty to live by the words they speak. You have a mere handful of people that lack a wide yellow stripe down their back. You have a mere handful of people that are not every bit as liberal as the average democrat.

In the off season, everyone on the right is a 'conservative'. But come election season, the truth comes out and the overwhelming majority of 'the right' is as hard left as their opposition. Lets face it. They knowingly and willingly tried to elect a guy that profits from the abortions his own laws enabled last time. Electing a mere con man is nothing by comparison.

Why should ANYONE think such people would EVER stand up for conservative principles or actual Conservatives when it actually matters? They REPEATEDLY show how low their character is and never EVER admit liberalism, as demonstrated by their votes, is what they desire.

If they did not want liberals, they would not VOTE for liberals.

Period.

Well, to extend some grace, most of those whom you describe look at politics and elections the same exact way they do a sporting event.  It's a contest and they want to be on the "winning team" just to feel the "euphoria" of a win and all the parades and parties that happen afterward so they can say "I was there.  I had a part in the big win".

For the majority - principles do not exist except when it is convenient.

The only principles for most is a paycheck, booze, cell phone, pizza, cable and porn on demand.

[Norm Lenhart]

The only principles for most is a paycheck, booze, cell phone, pizza, cable and porn on demand.

Which is what they should stick to as they clearly lack the intelligence or the morality to vote in the interests of their country or their fellow countrymen.

[Smokin Joe]

Well, to extend some grace, most of those whom you describe look at politics and elections the same exact way they do a sporting event.  It's a contest and they want to be on the "winning team" just to feel the "euphoria" of a win and all the parades and parties that happen afterward so they can say "I was there.  I had a part in the big win".

For the majority - principles do not exist except when it is convenient.

The only principles for most is a paycheck, booze, cell phone, pizza, cable and porn on demand.

I believe you are referring to Bread and Circuses Republicrats.

They are Republican/Democrat because:

their mommy or daddy was
their best or all of their friend(s) was
they dated this hunk or hot chick who was
they thought it would be cool
they got drunk at the county fair and signed up
they got promised free stuff
those other guys are rayciss
they are rayciss, but the party really isn't
they believe there ain't no free lunch
they want free lunch
they like donkeys, especially after Shrek
they like elephants, especially after Horton Hears a Who
they think (fill in blank with name) is cool and they are a Republican/Democrat
You couldn't march in the protest if you were one
etc...

It is a brand, like Coke or Pepsi, meaningless in any sense to them except it is their brand, and they'll defend it with their sacred vote, right or wrong. Besides, they had to go to the principal's office once and that was enough principals for them.

[wolfcreek]

  You can't get elected if you can't get on the ballot, and the GOP is not making that any easier for anyone outside the GOP cartel. It would be far easier to get a Conservative on a third party ballot because Conservatives are persona non grata at the GOP.

You are ignoring the full court press smear campaign against Cruz.

Birtherism
flap over a previously used (in other campaigns) fund raising mailer

"lyin' Ted" retweeted what, millions of times?

CNN and Carson dropping out retweet

The misrepresentation of comments after Chicago (spewed as supporting rioters against trump--NOT what he said)

Five mistress Enquirer article (Yes, Trump and Packer are old friends)

'Ted thinks he's the annointed one (someone else said that) and is a cult member nonsense

The flap over Mrs Trump's GQ layout being used in a PAC ad, wrongfully attributed to Cruz

The attack on Heidi's looks and mental state

Claims of "stealing delegates" & CO form typo

Heidi is the GLobalist banker CFR-Illuminati-Bilderbergers-Trilateral Commission Commissar and architect of NAFTA (lies)

Ted's Dad helped kill JFK

And all the time with the "lyin' Ted" twitter smear.

How can you ignore that? You don't think all that had an effect?

Tweets are generated by individuals not necessarily the media. Can't really control that.

[wolfcreek]

Actually, it is a question of match up and timing. I have little doubt that sans Trump, Cruz would have been resoundingly nominated. Without Trump's smear campaign against Cruz, he would have taken the nomination handily, and the rest of the field would have done about the same they did, with a few more people. But Trump appealed to the Angry Party, ironically, angry because the GOPe had not done its job and ticked off the same electorate that put Trump snugly in bed with them.

Plus ca change, plus ca meme chose.

With that in mind, the desired result of those voting on principle will not be achieved by repeatedly tilting at the GOP windmill.

Sans Trump, Bush [with his war chest] or some other candidate would have smeared Cruz. Obviously the man I voted for was ripe for being smeared.

Such is politics.

[aligncare]

Sans Trump, Bush [with his war chest] or some other candidate would have smeared Cruz. Obviously the man I voted for was ripe for being smeared.

Such is politics.

That's an interesting point you bring up. History is replete with bitter campaigns. Candidates say awful things about each other, always have, always will.

[Smokin Joe]

Tweets are generated by individuals not necessarily the media. Can't really control that.

One of those individuals was @realdonaldtrump. And his "lyin'" crap was retweeted. If he didn't put it out, it couldn't be retweeted. The media folks tweet, too, and they were retweeting it.

[Smokin Joe]

Sans Trump, Bush [with his war chest] or some other candidate would have smeared Cruz. Obviously the man I voted for was ripe for being smeared.

Such is politics.

Any person or candidate is ripe for being smeared. It could start with a facebook post that said 'wolfcreek was seen in a trench coat and sneakers self exposing to a playground full of kids' and you'd have to prove you didn't. That's the thing about smears. They aren't true, they never were, but it puts the opposition on the defensive, proving a negative. Any jackwagon with a blurry photo image can start one, and the lie will circle the globe before the truth gets out the door.

[Smokin Joe]

Tweets are generated by individuals not necessarily the media. Can't really control that.

SOme of those individuals are likely gainfully employed for that purpose. BTW, that long list was carried by a lot more than twitter, including tabloid media (oddly accepted as Gospel all of a sudden by parties who would ordinarily have dismissed it out of hand), closely tied to another candidate by virtue of an old friendship. Notice, the bulk of attacks were levied only at those who were in fact a threat to the orange tweeter.

[geronl]

The Trump campaign was huge on telling voters that Cruz was ineligible because he was a Canadian. You can bet that a lot more Iowans were told this than heard about the possible dropping out of Ben Carson, which came from CNN. It is a much bigger lie and it came directly from the Trump campaign.

[JustPassinThru]

The Trump campaign was huge on telling voters that Cruz was ineligible because he was a Canadian. You can bet that a lot more Iowans were told this than heard about the possible dropping out of Ben Carson, which came from CNN. It is a much bigger lie and it came directly from the Trump campaign.

It came straight from the foul mouth of Roger Stone.

Stone is a Nixon retread.  He studied at the knee of the Prince of Lies, back when he was a youngster fresh out of college.  He thought lying and Dirty Tricks were pretty neato-keeno; and he's since written some documents espousing that sort of political tactics.

Trump sought him out.  Birds of a feather, I guess.  But the lies just keep on coming - as I knew they would, once I saw that Trump was uninterested in facts or truth and that he'd gotten a Hired Slimer to put out this stuff.

[catfish1957]

It came straight from the foul mouth of Roger Stone.

Stone is a Nixon retread.  He studied at the knee of the Prince of Lies, back when he was a youngster fresh out of college.  He thought lying and Dirty Tricks were pretty neato-keeno; and he's since written some documents espousing that sort of political tactics.

Trump sought him out.  Birds of a feather, I guess.  But the lies just keep on coming - as I knew they would, once I saw that Trump was uninterested in facts or truth and that he'd gotten a Hired Slimer to put out this stuff.

Considering the likely complicity Trump is with the NI event, and association with Stone/Pecker, the involvment Russian wikileaks deal looks more plausible.

[Rivergirl]

Cruz won Iowa despite his insistence that he was against subsidies.  Not just corn subsidies but all subsidies while orange crush waffled.  He was against the subsidy before he was for the subsidy.