I would compare this to the following two scenarios: Providing a reference for a colleague and stating that you believe they are a competent and qualified candidate Vs Hiring a less than qualified candidate for a job because only two candidates applied for the job and you absolutely need to fill the position. Just curious but what percentage of the people on this board who plan to vote for Trump would also be willing to stand up on national television and say that they endorse the man. A man who has made fun of a handicapped person, implied that McCain was not a war hero, tweeted out an unflattering picture of another candidates wife, etc.... You would feel comfortable endorsing that type of man? I think Cruz just didn't feel comfortable endorsing that type of person but probably will still vote for him because the alternative is worse.
Okay, we are all in agreement to vote for Trump over Clinton. That was my point all along. Let's move on. /sarc
The point of all this is any sane middle class American should do whatever in his/her power to keep this new radical Lib agenda from destroying our country. As I said in another post, if Hillary ever gains total power with a congressional majority and Lib Supreme Court, every abstaining Rep will curse the day they helped America commit suicide. If that meant my voting for Cruz even with a strong dislike for the man, so be it.
I won't and I was one of the biggest Cruz booster around. If he is running for Senate against a Dem, I will still vote for him, but I will not go out of my way to support or promote him.
I won't either. Hopefully another constitutionalist with some ability to work with others while still holding his/her ground replaces Cruz. I will also never support any of the other establishment republicans working to get HRC elected.
you're continuing to prove the point. party over country. Cruz ran for Senate based upon conservative principles ... not as a GOP toad. he did so again for POTUS. But for all our whining about "the establishment," it's clear establishment is preferred regardless of the person holding the "establishment." Trump's nomination is clear evidence of that.
Man, you really don't get it. We are supporting Trump b/c he is the last, best hope to defeat HRC, which would ruin the US. We are choosing country over conservative ideals.
If that's true, then how'd Trump become the nominee? If you don't choose conservative ideals, you won't have a country. There is one distinct advantage an #HisSilentinBengHazi would afford which a Trumper wouldn't ... "the bad guy." Because "the establishment" IS about party over country, how much resistance do you think Trump is going to get when he uses single-payer as part of the reform, as opposed to #HisSilentinBengHazi? How much "push back" would a Trump administration get from congresssional GOP to augment funding for planned parenthood ... vice HRC's doing the same thing? Phil, you're not going to have the opportunity to vote Trump as the GOP nominee. For you to vote Trump in the general election, you'd better plan to write him in.
that means Trump will withdraw. His goal all along has been to BUY POTUS, not to BE POTUS. It seems pretty clear, the DNC isn't the only outfit with a "dithering apparatus" for the nomination. The one candidate HRC could defeat ... is now the nominee?
I disagree with you. He prizes *winning* over everything else. Maybe that was his thinking in the beginning, but he's too close now. He has no interest in being the next Ross Perot.
That's fine ... but you presume "winning" means the same thing for Trump as it does for you. I don't know you from adams allfox, but I'd bet a dollar to a donut those terms are NOT the same. II ---- thanks for your contribution to the thread and especially for your substantiation to why you think/feel/believe your statement to be accurate. Doesn't change the reality. If Trump wanted to win, he'd have made a much better overture to the Bernie people. With Pence, he's all but assured himself a loss, which will be evident, which will motivate a "change" so that he doesn't "lose." Trump will win the WH without having to take the oath of office ... and we conservatives will have only ourselves to blame.
That's because for all the howling about the two party establishment ... At the end of the day brand loyalty is a powerful force. Dial soap could be learned to be killing kitties ... I'd tend to buy dial soap. The top two GOP primary voters were cast as "outsiders" running against the establishment. Now we are mad because an outsider won't capitulate to the establishment? It'd be comical if it wasn't so sad!
I voted for Cruz here in Texas and I'll never vote for him again. Actually I would if he was running against HRC. We had 17 candidates that I would have voted for over Hillary. There was one candidate on the democratic primary that I would have seriously considered. Jim Webb was the best presidential candidate on that side and never had a chance due to the dnc rigged system. Hillary with her horrible decisions and actions is just flat out pathetic. If she wins this country will never recover after 12 years of **** from BHO and HRC. But I'm not sure what's worse, Hillary or the loons that would vote for her. Trump says stupid things from time to time, but he is for shutting down the borders, temporarily shutting down Muslims that come from hot bed countries that support terrorism until we have something in place that can stop the radicals. If we can't figure it out then they just don't come in PERIOD! Sorry but it's ignorant to worry about political correctness over our safety. I don't want to leave my kids, grandkids and great grandkids from worrying about getting blown up by suicide bombers years from now here in the USA on daily occurrence. Trump understands economics. Hillary understands the Clinton foundation and how to cheat the system to earn. And what's up with all these people dying mysteriously? One or two could be a coincidence. But there is a list of them. Hillary has failed miserably at foreign affairs. Under BHO and HRC there has never been a time in history that the world is so unstable. I'm not even getting into the pathological liar that she is. She even lies about lying about lying. It's just unbelievable.
I35 ... your vote is your vote. Getting mad at Ted Cruz for being Ted Cruz just seems silly to me, particularly, as you noted, there were many other options (IDK if I could agree that all 16 others were "best" options). The Trump Campaign knew what he was going to say ... and what he wasn't going to say. "Prince Reebus" had the same knowledge. Shoot, even Newt knew. At least that's what he said when he was interviewed the next day. So ... I think the level of agitation reflects a truth ... recognition that the GOP primary voters, overall, were duped. I can understand it, but reason must set-in at some point. Outfits like Breitbart (whom I generally appreciate) STILL raise this issue a month after the convention. Let it go. The extent one should be concerned-with Cruz is as their Senator, for that's what he is. Maybe he gets a chance late in the game ... I hope so, because, as I've said before, Trump will not allow himself to be elected. His win is getting #HisSilentingBengHazi elected ... and all that bevy of publicity for the Trump Industrie. He's gonna come-out smelling like a rose. "Believe me."
Would you mind translating that into English for those of us who are out of the loop? I have a distinct feeling that the rest of your post may make sense if I knew what that word meant.
LOL ... #HisSilentinBengHazi refers to the Democrat Nominee. I saw that used on a T-Shirt a couple months ago ... and have adopted it as her "legal" name as far as I'm concerned. Thanks for the chance to clarify.
... and Joe ... I think this speaks to the susceptibility we all have to marketing. The narrative from EVERY media source I've read/seen/heard, save for blogger Matt Walsh on The Blaze, has been some degree of critical toward Cruz for his "failure" to utter the words "Vote For Donald." So ... this and your previous at least provide correlation if not causation to this phenomenon/susceptibility.
I thought you were pointing out the obvious -- that the letter "H" in the word "Benghazi" is silent. But for the life of me, I couldn't figure out why you were saying that. I guess I was beating down the wrong path. lol. So thanks for pointing me down the right path by "clarifying" that #HisSilentinBengHazi is a reference to Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately, I'm still puzzled, because I can't figure out how the syllables / abbreviations / puns of that hashtag refer to Hillary Clinton. I've already spent way too much time on this, but I'm curious -- can you be explicit for the idiots like me who have no idea what you are saying?
I can't claim credit ... But as you are probably aware, "H" is her campaign symbol. I've even heard her referred-to as "H" You also are probably aware of her evasive testimony regarding the tragedy in Libya; over which she had operational and administrative control ... State Dept embassy. ... Finally, as you so noted, phoenically, the H is literally silent in Benghazi. So ... It's a multi-focus statement. It's no problem.
Lol, so it looks like I read it right and still didn't understand. I guess my confusion is that she did lots of things wrong in connection with Benghazi, but staying silent was not one of them.
I think It may also relate to the whitewater testimonies where she couldn't remember anything ... IOW ... Talks a lot ... Says nothing. (Kinda like the GOP nominee, come to think of it! )
Pretty misleading. First, it's not looking at Republican primary voters, and a Republican primary is the only context in which Perry would hypothetically face Cruz. Second, the same poll shows that 50 percent of Texas Republicans want Cruz to be the nominee for Senate in 2018. 43 percent want someone else.
