Cruz Thread

[Alex_H]

Has he not said that there are too many regulations? What makes you think those regulations don’t include those that protect you and yours?

He has been campaigning since early 2015. I haven’t heard him speak of food safety regulation as one of his top priorities. Even now if you look at his website, he says nothing of the sort. He does talk about ending regulations that add undue cost to businesses but doesn’t mention eliminating the requirement to wash hands after preparing raw food…

And with that, I have to go, for now, to be confirmed into the church and receive my first communion.

 

[sallybutler]

He has been campaigning since early 2015. I haven’t heard him speak of food safety regulation as one of his top priorities. Even now if you look at his website, he says nothing of the sort. He does talk about ending regulations that add undue cost to businesses but doesn’t mention eliminating the requirement to wash hands after preparing raw food…

And with that, I have to go, for now, to be confirmed into the church and receive my first communion.

Welcome into the Church.

Why do you think regulations that cost undue costs do not relate to food preparation?

 

[Little_Sheep]

…
The left and their allies in the mainstream media clearly want the current frontrunner because they think he’s the easiest to beat.

It’s very, very obvious what the left is doing, and for some reason, certain liberal activists and various members of the mainstream media do like to pick our candidates…

That’s interesting that you think this, SL, and it explains why you think my posts are following that reasoning and laden with a particular agenda. I don’t have an agenda. I know what I think and am simply enjoying all this play out. It is a fascinating election.

That said, I disagree completely with your belief that “we” think Trump will be easier for HRC to defeat. I personally think (and I think most of the left-leaning media seems to think) that it would be much easier for Hillary to beat Cruz. I don’t believe Cruz has the ability to attract many, if any, Democrats or Independents because he is SO Right leaning and thinking. But Trump really could attract Dems and Independents because he is a new type of fish all together - certainly more moderate than Cruz.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

That’s interesting that you think this, SL, and it explains why you think my posts are following that reasoning and laden with a particular agenda. I don’t have an agenda. I know what I think and am simply enjoying all this play out. It is a fascinating election.

That said, I disagree completely with your belief that “we” think Trump will be easier for HRC to defeat. I personally think (and I think most of the left-leaning media seems to think) that it would be much easier for Hillary to beat Cruz. I don’t believe Cruz has the ability to attract many, if any, Democrats or Independents because he is SO Right leaning and thinking. But Trump really could attract Dems and Independents because he is a new type of fish all together - certainly more moderate than Cruz.

Again, I agree with you, LS. Well said!

 

[TMC]

There will be a choice of VP. Cruz may choose somebody who will help with demographics that he may be struggling with and/or somebody who can help to flip a state or states red. Trump may do the same if he is the nominee. But if the outlook is just so negative for Cruz and probably Trump too, and they are doing so badly with so many different demograhics, that it looks like they would have little to chance to win looking at the polls, why will the Clinton campaign, super pacs etc. probably spend hundreds of millions of dollars against whoever the Republican nominee is, maybe even up to or over $1 billion dollars? Because this is not in the bag for Clinton. Although she does better than Trump on various polled issues, she still has high negatives, only 8% less than Trump in a CNN poll, and that is saying something, when you consider the outrageous and controversial things Trump has said and done. There is also the possibility she could be indicted. Neither Cruz nor Trump may even end up as the nominee.

All true, well except for the indictment part. Clinton and the Dems will wage a vigorous and expensive campaign, and nothing is guaranteed. But if Cruz is the nominee, I think he will lose badly.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

He has been campaigning since early 2015. I haven’t heard him speak of food safety regulation as one of his top priorities. Even now if you look at his website, he says nothing of the sort. He does talk about ending regulations that add undue cost to businesses but doesn’t mention eliminating the requirement to wash hands after preparing raw food…

And with that, I have to go, for now, to be confirmed into the church and receive my first communion.

Welcome into full communion with the Church Alex H.! Glad to have you!

 

[Lily_Bernans]

All true, well except for the indictment part. Clinton and the Dems will wage a vigorous and expensive campaign, and nothing is guaranteed. But if Cruz is the nominee, I think he will lose badly.

I agree with you. Cruz would lose badly, and Hillary will not be indicted.

 

[Little_Sheep]

All true, well except for the indictment part. Clinton and the Dems will wage a vigorous and expensive campaign, and nothing is guaranteed. But if Cruz is the nominee, I think he will lose badly.

This come closest to my personal thoughts. Confident as I feel, Trump can simply NOT be counted out in the general. Cruz, of course, can.

And the “indictment” hullabaloo is the reddest of herrings.

 

[Peter_J]

This come closest to my personal thoughts. Confident as I feel, Trump can simply NOT be counted out in the general. **Cruz, of course, can.
**

Well of course. Have we ever doubted anything you’ve told us to believe?

 

[Little_Sheep]

Well of course. Have we ever doubted anything you’ve told us to believe?

I’m sure you have! Like others here, I’m simply sharing my thoughts and opinions.

Have a blessed Easter, Peter J!

 

[Little_Sheep]

Well of course. Have we ever doubted anything you’ve told us to believe?

I wasn’t aware that I’d ever told anyone here to what to believe! That’s not even possible. Like others, I’m simply sharing my thoughts and opinions.

Have a blessed Easter, Peter J!

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Well of course. Have we ever doubted anything you’ve told us to believe?

Kasich, of all people, is polling neck-and-neck with Trump in Pennsylvania right now! I, personally, would have never thought that! Talk about coming from behind! Of course I don’t think Kasich stands a chance to win the nomination. But if he stays in the race, it could be a brokered convention, which might be a good thing for Republicans. Find someone most Republicans agree on, someone who isn’t as extreme as Cruz or as crass as Trump.

 

[carpenter383]

Many people accused Regan of being too conservative and unelectable, yet he won in a landslide.
The last 2 moderate gop candidates (Romney and mcain) lost because so many republicans decided not to vote, they weren’t motivated.
A strong conservative will motivate republican voters, a rino or democrat-lite will not.

 

[_Abyssinia]

All true, well except for the indictment part. Clinton and the Dems will wage a vigorous and expensive campaign, and nothing is guaranteed. But if Cruz is the nominee, I think he will lose badly.

Clinton could get indicted, that is true also.

So called Republican moderates, nine of them, have lost, ten if George HW Bush is counted because he lost reelection: spectator.org/articles/34459/when-conservatism-second-language

I’m not sure about Cruz’ electability, but he is doing better in the polling with Millennials than Clinton is. He has been able to win in the primary in states from Maine to Utah, so…

 

[Cathoholic]

If Cruz is the nominee, I think he will win handily.

It never works putting up Republican-democrat-lites to win over Democrats.

Just keep that in mind. Keep repeating it and thinking about it and you will see it’s true.

Every 4 years were are told that’s wrong, they force the “moderate” in for the Republican nomination, then they get beat.

They tell us during these elections, we NEED to “unite” behind the (“moderate”) nominee.

Even the Bush’s rode into the White House on Ronald Regan’s coattails.

Dole? McCain? Romney? Kasich?

These are very nice people. But they are too moderate and when a Democrat voter sees them, they not only pick the Democrat, but it allows the Democrats to move even further to the left incrementally with their nominees.

When a Republican voter sees uninspiring “moderates” (aka as squishy on the abortion issue), on the ticket, they often remain home on election day or a few of them write in a conscience vote.

. . . Republican-Democrat-lites cannot beat Democrats for the White House. You need a Conservative Republican with the way the country is. Don’t put up another proverbial Dole, McCain, or Romney.

Republican-Democrat-lites cannot beat Democrats for the White House. You need a Conservative Republican with the way the country is. Don’t put up another proverbial Dole, McCain, or Romney.

Republican-Democrat-lites cannot beat Democrats for the White House. You need a Conservative Republican with the way the country is. Don’t put up another proverbial Dole, McCain, or Romney. . . .

 

[grotto]

Cruz is making matters worse for himself. Trump has stated flatly that he has had zero to do with the gossip of the Nat’l Enq. This has been verified by the editor of NE. Rumors are unstable - sometimes that have a puff of smoke.

 

[meltzerboy]

Many people accused Regan of being too conservative and unelectable, yet he won in a landslide.
The last 2 moderate gop candidates (Romney and mcain) lost because so many republicans decided not to vote, they weren’t motivated.
A strong conservative will motivate republican voters, a rino or democrat-lite will not.

That is the conservative argument and what many Republicans want. I say then let conservatives nominate Cruz at the convention, if it is possible, and let’s see what happens in the general election so we can know once and for all if it makes a difference.

 

[Little_Sheep]

That is the conservative argument and what many Republicans want. I say then let conservatives nominate Cruz at the convention, if it is possible, and let’s see what happens in the general election so we can know once and for all if it makes a difference.

That would be interesting, for sure! But do you think the Party will nominate Cruz? It seems to me that many of them don’t like him much - otherwise I think they would have jumped on his side early, especially as Trump started to sweep up all the votes.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

That would be interesting, for sure! But do you think the Party will nominate Cruz? It seems to me that many of them don’t like him much - otherwise I think they would have jumped on his side early, especially as Trump started to sweep up all the votes.

Even the people who can’t stand Cruz, like Lindsay Graham, are supporting him. Unlikable as he is, he seems better than Trump to most Republicans. I think most Republicans thought Trump would fade long before this and were horrified when he didn’t.

 

[meltzerboy]

That would be interesting, for sure! But do you think the Party will nominate Cruz? It seems to me that many of them don’t like him much - otherwise I think they would have jumped on his side early, especially as Trump started to sweep up all the votes.

It may depend on how much the Party dislikes Trump. I think Cruz is more representative of the tenets of the GOP than either Trump or Kasich despite his lack of likability within the Party. And he will no doubt come in second (if not first) among the delegate count, so his candidacy is more justified to my mind than Kasich’s, let alone someone who did not even run, no matter what the rules of a contested convention are.