Ted Cruz Dropping Out of Republican Presidential Race

[irishpatrick]

I agree with you. The Republican Party will continue in name only. Trump has defiled it and caused what was truly conservative to disappear. He has torn the party to shreds. How it will reinvent itself, I have no idea. And, if Trump should become president and fail to deliver on his plethora of promises, then I think he will be the most unpopular president of all time.

It is already morphing away from vital issues, like life, marriage, family, etc.

 

[gracepoole]

How to explain the Trump phenomena? I pretend to no special insight but let me put to one side my pile of books, set down my latest copy of the National Review, and try to describe what my eyes behold. I see my children, relatives, friends, neighbors, and their like among the long neglected working classes of our country for whom even the possibility of prosperity seems a lost hope. These are the people largely ignored by the elites of both parties. A lot of these seldom vote, and some never. This year a great many have come out and voted for a bull in a china shop out of pent up frustration and personal pain. So now what? I’ll follow my conscience which tells me to do my civic duty, and vote against the candidate of the Party of Death, against the cynical Caesars who would supplant the prerogatives of the altar, natural law and revealed truth, with their sickly substitutes of political correctness and the party line.

This is a really positive reading of his supporters. Those I know personally (not here) are fairly ugly – they seem to be guided solely by tremendous and often irrational fear of others. They willfully overlook his many changing positions on core conservative issues. They rally behind his call for a wall that can’t be built for any number of reasons. They ignore his incredibly disparaging comments about women. And they seem to do so because they like that someone is vocalizing the very worst parts of themselves. It’s an awful mix. Let’s face it. Our country has put the two least trustworthy candidates at the top of the polls. God help us, no one’s conscience will be clean at the end of it all.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

If it were not for the Democratic Party, millions of people would have been born, but were instead killed–and those killings continue and Democrats never cease fighting to continue the slaughter. So much so that they made sure it is their party platform.

As for Trump and Kasich, I agree–they too support the killing of a great many innocents. However, they do so against the general platform of the Republican Party, which has for many years proclaimed its support for human life from natural conception to natural death.

It was a Republican Supreme Court who upheld Roe v. Wade, not a Democratic one. And it was a Republican Supreme Court that upheld PP v. Casey, not a Democratic one. And abortion has dropped by 13% under Obama.

No Democrat has ever forced a woman to make the decision to have an abortion. The Democratic platform is pro-choice, but it is also much more.

The Republicans have chosen Trump, a man who does favor abortion “with exceptions.” That may go against the Republican platform, but they still telegraphed their intention of making him their nominee, so they are “in it” as much as Democrats are.

We all know the parties’ platforms, so no need to be disrespectful and uncharitable. I can’t stand Trump, but I will speak of him civilly.

 

[irishpatrick]

Trump isn’t advocating for killing the unborn as Hillary and the Culture of Death came from Rome in relation to the Democrat abortion agenda promoted and pushed by the Democrats and daily monthly and yearly. I have no issue not referring to them as the Culture of Death but lets not confuse their promoted agenda with Trump or the republicans. The best one can suggest is Trump isn’t a conservative as I would like in a moral comparison to other Reps. But compared to Hillary, Donald is saint material.

Disingenuous comparison imho. Course I would debate the point and have. Democrats lose I assure you.

Trump is for the exceptions of incest, rape, and life of the mother. Anyone who takes a serious look at the issue knows that equals abortion on demand–which means there is not practical difference between Trump and Hillary. Let us not confuse spoken words with reality.

The only issue I see a difference with is immigration, and the border. Maybe that’s enough, but it really is the only thing truly different. Trump is the establishment and has been for at least 20 years.

 

[Robert_Bay]

MODERATOR NOTICE

Posts are becoming uncharitable, referring to followers of one or another candidate as murderers or racists (or inferring as much.) THIS MUST STOP

I will start issuing infractions.

 

[Corki]

I am not sure he has much of a political future. This political campaign was too nasty.

There’s already talk about him running for Governor. He is very well liked and respected within the GOP in Texas.

 

[GaryTaylor]

This is a really positive reading of his supporters. Those I know personally (not here) are fairly ugly – they seem to be guided solely by tremendous and often irrational fear of others. They willfully overlook his many changing positions on core conservative issues. They rally behind his call for a wall that can’t be built for any number of reasons. They ignore his incredibly disparaging comments about women. And they seem to do so because they like that someone is vocalizing the very worst parts of themselves. It’s an awful mix. Let’s face it. Our country has put the two least trustworthy candidates at the top of the polls. God help us, no one’s conscience will be clean at the end of it all.

And then we have the daily scheduled riots by the democrats, the dove, love and peace party. I would suggest a slightly bias opinion and probably a good conversation to avoid here.

And the comments aspect is simple back and forth rhetoric suggesting one should take a specific comment to heart such as with women while Hillary is calling rep literally terrorists, white racist and sexist. Please its a political conversation of rhetoric and if one screams racist enough it will be a fact. Double standard of politics imho.

 

[irishpatrick]

It was a Republican Supreme Court who upheld Roe v. Wade, not a Democratic one. And it was a Republican Supreme Court that upheld PP v. Casey, not a Democratic one. And abortion has dropped by 13% under Obama.

No Democrat has ever forced a woman to make the decision to have an abortion. The Democratic platform is pro-choice, but it is also much more.

The Republicans have chosen Trump, a man who does favor abortion “with exceptions.” That may go against the Republican platform, but they still telegraphed their intention of making him their nominee, so they are “in it” as much as Democrats are.

We all know the parties’ platforms, so no need to be disrespectful and uncharitable. I can’t stand Trump, but I will speak of him civilly.

Sure, but it was the Democrats who have refused any reasonable compromises regarding abortion. Had they joined us to help protect life, it would have happened.

I agree–the Republican Party can no longer call itself the party of life, for its had its chances to help the unborn, and it has basically produced nothing.

The truth is, we are living in a culture of death, first driven by the Democrats and now joined by the Republicans.

Does the USA deserve to survive if it continues to legally slaughter its most vulnerable? Does it deserve to survive if it continues to attack marriage and the family? Perhaps recent times are giving us the answer.

As for the drop in the abortion rate–there are many ways to view that, not least of which has been the general awakening to the reality that those lives are sacred. We are likely to see those rates remain lower than they used to be because prolife people have been pounding the issue for several decades.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I agree–the Republican Party can no longer call itself the party of life, for its had its chances to help the unborn, and it has basically produced nothing.

When was the Rep the party of life and what changed in reality? Listen the entire reason the rep are voting for Trump is the rep haven’t done a damn thing which Lilly will tell you.

So how does it wash that since they now intend to correct this issue they are no longer the party of life. It doesn’t make since and frankly is contrary to reality. And until more is stated and done the jury imho is still out? Oh I think so brother.

 

[Monkey1976]

It was a Republican Supreme Court who upheld Roe v. Wade, not a Democratic one. And it was a Republican Supreme Court that upheld PP v. Casey, not a Democratic one. And abortion has dropped by 13% under Obama.

No Democrat has ever forced a woman to make the decision to have an abortion. The Democratic platform is pro-choice, but it is also much more.

The Republicans have chosen Trump, a man who does favor abortion “with exceptions.” That may go against the Republican platform, but they still telegraphed their intention of making him their nominee, so they are “in it” as much as Democrats are.

We all know the parties’ platforms, so no need to be disrespectful and uncharitable. I can’t stand Trump, but I will speak of him civilly.

If a house is on fire, does the blame for the fire fall with the neighbor who’s trying to put it out with a garden hose, or the one dumping cans of gasoline on it?

 

[irishpatrick]

When was the Rep the party of life and what changed in reality? Listen the entire reason the rep are voting for Trump is the rep haven’t done a damn thing which Lilly will tell you.

So how does it wash that since they now intend to correct this issue they are no longer the party of life. It doesn’t make since and frankly is contrary to reality. And until more is stated and done the jury imho is still out? Oh I think so brother.

They have chosen a person who supports exceptions for incest, rape, and life of the mother. That is not a prolife position. The party has done nothing regarding the life issue, at least nothing with any practical value to the lives being lost. I conclude the GOP is no longer a party of life. Sadly.

Republican voters had prolife choices–Cruz and Santorum are 100% prolife. Yet, Republicans today seem to care very little about any of the core (critical) social issues that are harming this country. An authentically prolife person today has no more chance at attaining the GOP nomination, than they would running for the DNC nomination. There hasn’t been a change in the GOP platform, there’s been a radical change in what the voters want and they have locked out truly prolife candidates. Republicans voters have given-up on the life, marriage, and family issues.

 

[GaryTaylor]

They have chosen a person who supports exceptions for incest, rape, and life of the mother. That is not a prolife position. The party has done nothing regarding the life issue, at least nothing with any practical value to the lives being lost. I conclude the GOP is no longer a party of life. Sadly.

Of course its a pro life position and in fact a practical one. Whats not practical is John K for example banning abortion and contraceptives. How is that realistic?

Listen as a Catholic no-one wants to see the 73 horror show addressed more than me but theres a level or practical which John or Ted or Rubio could not reach and simply was not realistic unless we are talking theocracy, executive order and basically ignoring the will of half the population. Its not reasonable. The object isn’t to enslave the democrats but actually work with them to mitigate 1-million murders a year.

It looked good on paper and the talk appeased the christians for years. But its been a losing proposition in reality. We can be practical and mitigate killing.

You know its not surprising why a good deal of females are stunned by this aggressive thinking. Just saying

 

[Boatswain2PA]

While I’m sure most of us here would much rather Trump, and all Republicans, be more stringently pro-life, a comparison of the various Republican positions and the various Democrat positions shows a vast divide.

Republican position is, generally, abortions only in exceptional circumstances (rape, incest, severe deformity, etc).

Democrat position is abortion on demand, for any reason, up until birth.

Put into this perspective, the Republican position (and Trump’s position) is remarkable pro-life in comparison to the Democratic (and Hillary’s) position.

 

[Crossbones]

They have chosen a person who supports exceptions for incest, rape, and life of the mother. That is not a prolife position. The party has done nothing regarding the life issue, at least nothing with any practical value to the lives being lost. I conclude the GOP is no longer a party of life. Sadly.

Republican voters had prolife choices–Cruz and Santorum are 100% prolife. Yet, Republicans today seem to care very little about any of the core (critical) social issues that are harming this country. An authentically prolife person today has no more chance at attaining the GOP nomination, than they would running for the DNC nomination. There hasn’t been a change in the GOP platform, there’s been a radical change in what the voters want and they have locked out truly prolife candidates. Republicans voters have given-up on the life, marriage, and family issues.

Remember that the Wall Street Republicans think that those social issues are dragging down the party. It would almost seem they would be having their day in that a candidate without strong positions (or, in some cases, incoherent and rapidly changing positions) on social issues is about to receive the nomination, but he’s not their man either.

The fact is the majority of the Republican primary voters don’t care strongly enough about social issues to select a Presidential nominee that thinks about them.

If Trump wins, social conservatives are permanently on the outside of the GOP and will not have a say in events on a national level again.

 

[irishpatrick]

Of course its a pro life position and in fact a practical one. Whats not practical is John K for example banning abortion and contraceptives. How is that realistic?

Listen as a Catholic no-one wants to see the 73 horror show addressed more than me but theres a level or practical which John or Ted or Rubio could not reach and simply was not realistic unless we are talking theocracy, executive order and basically ignoring the will of half the population. Its not reasonable. The object isn’t to enslave the democrats but actually work with them to mitigate 1-million murders a year.

It looked good on paper and the talk appeased the christians for years. But its been a losing proposition in reality. We can be practical and mitigate killing.

You know its not surprising why a good deal of females are stunned by this aggressive thinking. Just saying

No–not true at all. The life of the mother exception has been shown to be open for any doctor or woman to state the mother’s life is at risk. It is a fully wide-open exception that basically leads to abortion on demand. That is why prolife people have fought the LOTM exception.

I wonder if we replaced the word abortion with the word slavery, how people would think and vote then.

We can terminate little Johnny or little Susie because half of the populace wants to do that. Let’s see, we can enslaved little Johnny or little Susie because half of the population wants to do that.

 

[irishpatrick]

Remember that the Wall Street Republicans think that those social issues are dragging down the party. It would almost seem they would be having their day in that a candidate without strong positions (or, in some cases, incoherent and rapidly changing positions) on social issues is about to receive the nomination, but he’s not their man either.

The fact is the majority of the Republican primary voters don’t care strongly enough about social issues to select a Presidential nominee that thinks about them.

If Trump wins, social conservatives are permanently on the outside of the GOP and will not have a say in events on a national level again.

Yes, that is my point. The GOP is no longer a party of life, or of marriage and the family. There is nowhere to go for people who will always care about those issues, which sadly seems to be less each year.

 

[mary_bobo]

They have chosen a person who supports exceptions for incest, rape, and life of the mother. That is not a prolife position. The party has done nothing regarding the life issue, at least nothing with any practical value to the lives being lost. I conclude the GOP is no longer a party of life. Sadly.

Republican voters had prolife choices–Cruz and Santorum are 100% prolife. Yet, Republicans today seem to care very little about any of the core (critical) social issues that are harming this country. An authentically prolife person today has no more chance at attaining the GOP nomination, than they would running for the DNC nomination. There hasn’t been a change in the GOP platform, there’s been a radical change in what the voters want and they have locked out truly prolife candidates. Republicans voters have given-up on the life, marriage, and family issues.

So vote for Hillary or some third party candidate which will give it to Hillary in the long run. I do not disagree with your opinion, but I think one has to think beyond this. Just how likely is it that any president can overturn RvW? I proffer not at all. Sometimes we have to be willing to take baby steps and as we say, choose the lesser of two evils.

I have been very confused by the reasons some of our posters give for supporting Hillary, but that is between them and God. I have to worry more about my salvation than theirs.

The GOP voters are in a collective snit and want someone outside of those now in power. I don’t know how that will turn out, and although Trump was certainly not my choice, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I know what Hillary stands for.

 

[irishpatrick]

While I’m sure most of us here would much rather Trump, and all Republicans, be more stringently pro-life, a comparison of the various Republican positions and the various Democrat positions shows a vast divide.

Republican position is, generally, abortions only in exceptional circumstances (rape, incest, severe deformity, etc).

Democrat position is abortion on demand, for any reason, up until birth.

Put into this perspective, the Republican position (and Trump’s position) is remarkable pro-life in comparison to the Democratic (and Hillary’s) position.

No–not close to true. Most Republicans today support the three major exceptions (incest, rape, life of the mother). The life of the mother basically equals abortion on demand.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Remember that the Wall Street Republicans think that those social issues are dragging down the party. It would almost seem they would be having their day in that a candidate without strong positions (or, in some cases, incoherent and rapidly changing positions) on social issues is about to receive the nomination, but he’s not their man either.

If Trump wins, social conservatives are permanently on the outside of the GOP and will not have a say in events on a national level again.

But you start on the false premise Trump isn’t conservative, thats not a fact but an opinion which conceals accusation and agenda.

The fact is the majority of the Republican primary voters don’t care strongly enough about social issues to select a Presidential nominee that thinks about them.

Untrue and they just did what they desired by dropping the DC insiders for one outside.

Remember that the Wall Street Republicans think that those social issues are dragging down the party.

Whos an authority on what a WSR is in fact IF they actually exist?

I don’t see any point?

 

[ringil]

I am pleased that Trump is the GOP candidate.

There is no chance that Trump will beat Clinton.

This may be a “Dukakis style” landslide except this time with the Democrat on top.