Disagree that it's about style over substance. They were each asked as part of a structured debate to say something positive about the other. O'Rourke genuinely did this. Cruz used it as a chance for a cheap-shot. Heck even Trump and Clinton both gave real answers to this same question in their debate rather than dodge the question.
Yes. Always. It was different back in the day, because we didn't have televised debates and because voters prioritized different issues. However, did a significant number of voters vote on superficialities rather than relevant issues? Yes. And keep in mind that this is bigger than politics. It's the same reason why companies that make crappy beer but run TV ads with chicks in bikinis sell more beer than companies that make good beer but do minimal advertising. Yes, this is true, but the point is that you can accept it and adapt to it since you can't do anything about it, or you can whine about it and lose votes needlessly.
I think his point is that this has nothing to do with issues, so there's no reason why someone should vote for Beta just because Cruz acted like a douche. I agree with him that they shouldn't, but that's like wishing it never got above 65 degrees in August. It's simply a fact of life.
Cruz gets a lot of flack for being a dick. To his credit, he didnt take any low blows on the DUI question. Classy move by Ted.
This is true, but from a realistic standpoint, it's not easy to directly exploit a 20 year old DWI. It more creates a negative feeling than anything else.
Of course. If you're a conservative or even somewhat conservative SCOTUS nominee, you'll get ripped if you scratched your nuts the wrong way in 1978.
they both graduated from Ivy League schools so I can't vote for either of them, though Beto seems like an ok guy and Cruz seems like a really demented reptile. Both act entitled. I would like to vote for a candidate from A&M Canyon or UTEP or some other civilized place rather than those east coast zhit factories.
@Mr. Deez ... this is what I mean. making a vote based upon an alma mater is more important than the policies promoted/pursued. Sorry Huisache ... I don't understand that thinking. I have a HS friend who has essentially said the same thing ... can't vote for either of 'em. sigh. if that's not letting good be the enemy of best ... IDK what is. Voting conscience is going to get Beta (like that) elected.
I don't see good or best in either, just more of the same arrogant supposed meritocratic rot. Has either talked about or done anything to deal with the debt? Beto is running as a free stuff liberal and for essentially open borders. Cruz is an egomaniac by any standard and his only principle is to get elected president so he can do God only knows what Rather than hunker down and learn the job and do something for Texas he runs around kissing Azz to a bunch of knuckle draggers and positioning himself to become the philosopher king They both suck and I don't vote for people like Obama who won't learn the job or do it for our benefit. You would vote for von Papen over Hitler and I would hang both of them. Sam Rayburn told LBJ that he would feel a lot better about Kennedy's cabinet if one of them had been a rural sheriff instead of Harvard's best and brightest They took us to Vietnam Nam and the next generation decided to straighten out the mess in the Middle East Fugue 'em
I'm not sure what you mean by Cruz getting cozy with "knuckle-draggers" ... but whatever. Cruz ran on a Constitutional platform in 2012 and has been one of the Senate's most vocal members ... If it's a personality issue ... or the sound of his voice ... I won't object to the disklike ... but on issues, Cruz is one of the most sound and clearest in Congress. He's one of the most talented analyzers, too. your analogy of the two Germans is overplayed. As I've said ... I was disappointed in Cruz' support for Trump ... but I learned I was wrong about Trump ... so how can I hold it against Cruz??? No sir ... this isn't really a "hold your nose" issue. Cruz is more than sufficiently sound in policy/position/philosophy. It shouldn't even be close.
Remember Cruz is hated mostly because he fought against establishment Ds and Rs in the Senate. That people hate him in DC should be a big reason conservatives in Texas vote for him. He's an a-hole, but he's our a-hole and he's right.
I know what you mean. My point was that people voting on superficialities is a fact of life politicians have to account for - not that voters don't vote on superficialities. Of course, in the case of huisache, there's not much Cruz or Beta could do. Neither can undo the fact that they went to Ivy League schools, and once they went Ivy League, they were dead to him.
I guess I don't have to worry about being sought for good campaign advice, then. Shoot straight as you can ... be honest about what you believe and your intentions/goals ... but yes, this presumes the electorate is equally concerned about things that matter over those which really don't. Which refers to the point about the people's general failure to be self-governing and self-disciplined. So ... vote for Cruz and delay the revolution ... or elect ORourke and hasten it.
we all agree then that I will continue to see the Ivy League as a source of rot and decline to vote for any of the meritocrats and you guys will get behind the ones who are aligned with your ideological preferences. Make sure your kids get signed up for the next war they feel it is necessary for somebody else to fight
The Ivy League education doesn't endear me either ... but if a graduate of that bunch is going to make a campaign promise about restoring the Fed to its Constitutionally-directed duties ... Then I don't care nearly as much about the Harvard Sheepskin as the actions taken as the proposed legislator. There will be plenty of opportunity to fight for what's right ... because ... PEOPLE. People from Yale ... people from West Texas A&M ... UTEP ... and UT. If ideology isn't the first point in considering a candidate for office, then the voter has his priorities fouled up ... in my humble, but accurate, opinion.
I also see the Ivy League as a source of rot and decline. I see it as a place for entrenched, old money northeast liberals to send their children for rank indoctrination and to make the "right" connections. I definitely see it as a place that will never understand the great swathe of middle America or the good people of various political persuasions who live within. The Ivies would not deign to lower themselves to actually live here and learn why people value what we value, and choose to live as we live. The Ivies would never understand the cultural melting pot that is, for example, San Antonio. They prefer to simply close their eyes, stick their fingers in their ears, and shout about how racist we are, projecting their own elitist and racist motives and upbringing onto us. And of course, they always seem to know what is best for the rest of us, and it always seems to involve another wasteful and woefully ineffective federal program or three. So yeah, f the Ivies. With that said, not everybody who attends is successfully indoctrinated. Not everybody who attends is old money. Not everybody who attends feels the need to kiss the asses and bow down to the old money Ivies. That, to me, is how I perceive Ted Cruz. And that is precisely why I voted for him over Dewhurst (who may not be of their ilk, but is most definitely a political *** kisser of the highest order). And Ted's willingness to stand up and filibuster, to call out the rot of the Ivies, is why I will continue to vote for him. As was said up the thread, "he may be an *******, but he is our *******", and he does a good job representing the people and values of Texas.
My viewpoint is similar to Sangre's about the Ivy Leagues and Cruz. However, I will say if we have to pass on voting a few conservative Ivy leaguers to effectively break the damn of the DC Swamp, then I am all for it. Those schools and the culture they represent are the source of all the Cultural Marxism and Socialism we are fighting against in this country. Even Cal-Berkley and Stanford were formed by immigrants from that same culture. It is why we have elites on both coasts.
I saw something on the way to work this morning that exemplified the reason I hate the whole O'Rourke movement. Not unusual I saw a car with a "Beto" sticker in the back windshield. But then I saw another sticker and it read "Baltimore, Maryland". So I looked down at the license plate to see where the car was registered. Virginia. Basically DC suburbs. So this douche moves to Texas and even before he takes care of his vehicle licensing responsibility he slaps a "Beto" sticker on it. I wonder if this guy is even eligible to vote in Texas this year and if he will attempt to vote illegally. Cruz maybe hasn't done a good job of convincing people, but O'Rourke doesn't represent Texas values and there are way too many examples to prove it.
The only requirement to register to vote is being a resident of a county and have registered before 10/9. And be at least 17 years, 10 months old with no parole/probation from a felony. The bar isn't exactly high, including whether or not he got his plates/registration updated yet.
It still pisses me off that many of the people supporting Beto aren't Texans. And usually it takes living in Texas a year before you are granted residence.
30 days unless you're surrendering a valid ID from a different state in order to obtain a Texas one, in which case it's immediate. I think you're thinking of establishing residency for in-state tuition at an accredited college, not voter registration.
Horns11 is correct. It's a different standard for voting, and even if it helps a candidate I don't like in this situation, it's a good standard. If you move to a new state, should you really have to go back to your old state and vote for people who aren't going to represent you? Obviously, there has to be a cutoff at some point, but it should be as late as reasonably possible.
Not even just things as simple as college tuition...same standard applies on certain matters in litigation. For example, on a debt-related matter, one generally does not gain the protections of the Texas Statute of Limitations until having been a resident for one year. I've got no qualms with someone who recently moved being able to register to vote for the very reasons cited by Deez...
