A Few Comments about Cruz and Rubio

[Illya. K. Makrus]

Just some thoughts to share.

Ted Cruz
I'm a Texan, and Cruz is our senator. He is a true fighter for conservative values, or more precisely, "very conservative values", no doubt about that. He promised that he would fight against Obama, and so he did, fiercely. Nowadays few politicians keep their promises to that extent. If you are a very conservative voter, Cruz has a proven record of being a loyal conservative -- something you may highly value.

The downside, however, is that the man stands for "very conservative values". Not everybody support all of them (certainly not me). To make the matter "worse", he has proven that he does not bother to negotiate (reasonably and effectively) with the left, or anyone who do not share his extreme conservative values. That worries a lot of people who are relatively moderate. The concern is that while he fights for his very conservative values with strong resolution, little can be achieved under our bipartisan government. After all, this is a country with highly diversified views, and he is a candidate who seems to care about only the (extreme) conservatives.

Another problem in my opinion is the lies and frauds from himself and his campaigns. Every politician lies, and lying on a few issues is probably fine. However, some dirty tricks are just disgusting. For me, the bottom line is that you (or your campaign) cannot fool voters for their votes directly. The scams about Carson, and the voter violation fraud obviously crossed that line. Also, Cruz fired his communication director for putting on a false video on Rubio recently. To me, these form a pattern of "dishonesty" unparalleled among all campaigns.

Note that an avid Cruz supporter on the forum (BOSS) argued that those dirty tricks were not from Cruz himself, and that Cruz had zero control over what his PACs did, therefore he should not be blamed. I will leave the readers of the thread to decide whether Cruz should be held responsible.

Marco Rubio
He was my favorite candidate before Trump jumped in. He is young and energetic, with a pretty good resume and an inspiring life story. He is much quicker and smarter than Jeb (which is, in my opinion, totally incompetent), and he has a good memory. Also, he is more moderate and open minded compared to Cruz, something appealing to an independent like myself.

What concerns me most about Rubio is his "unusual reaction" against pressure. He sweats like a nervous kid, recites well-prepared debate responses like a robot, and melted down in an inexcusable way against Christie. All of these are clearly signs of weakness. To me, this is much worse than disagreement on certain political positions, and it cannot be corrected in a short period of time. I do not think that someone who failed to stand the pressure of a TV debate can be trusted as the president of the United States. If he can be destroyed by Christie in a Republican debate, what can I expect of him going against leaders such as Putin or Xi? Can I count on him to fight for the American people's best interest against pressure from the Congress and other countries around the world? Rubio might become a successful leader given more time, but now he just doesn't seem ready for the job.

I'd be happy to learn more about your opinions on these two candidates (why do you like/dislike them). However, please refrain yourselves from personal attacks -- we've had enough on TV!

 

[ZackB]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

 

[sarahgop]

I dont care if Rubio is gay and has lots of women for sex. I stick to the issues and he is pro illegal anti american.

 

[Illya. K. Makrus]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

Cruz is indeed ideological. The problem is that he's on the far right. Let's say that he gets the nomination. It's difficult to imagine anybody from the left or a vast majority of the independent supporting Cruz. Are you concerned that he might not be able to defeat Clinton or Sanders in the general election?

 

[Avatar4321]

He is crushing both of them in the polls. Not worried at all. Intelligent, honest, and principled will always beat ignorant, lying, and opportunistic head to head

 

[sarahgop]

Neither cruz or rubio has a chance against clinton, though rubio can pull in some gay votes and some bill clinton votes from people who like men who sleep with lots of women.

 

[Boss]

Just some thoughts to share.

Ted Cruz
I'm a Texan, and Cruz is our senator. He is a true fighter for conservative values, or more precisely, "very conservative values", no doubt about that. He promised that he would fight against Obama, and so he did, fiercely. Nowadays few politicians keep their promises to that extent. If you are a very conservative voter, Cruz has a proven record of being a loyal conservative -- something you may highly value.

The downside, however, is that the man stands for "very conservative values". Not everybody support all of them (certainly not me). To make the matter "worse", he has proven that he does not bother to negotiate (reasonably and effectively) with the left, or anyone who do not share his extreme conservative values. That worries a lot of people who are relatively moderate. The concern is that while he fights for his very conservative values with strong resolution, little can be achieved under our bipartisan government. After all, this is a country with highly diversified views, and he is a candidate who seems to care about only the (extreme) conservatives.

Another problem in my opinion is the lies and frauds from himself and his campaigns. Every politician lies, and lying on a few issues is probably fine. However, some dirty tricks are just disgusting. For me, the bottom line is that you (or your campaign) cannot fool voters for their votes directly. The scams about Carson, and the voter violation fraud obviously crossed that line. Also, Cruz fired his communication director for putting on a false video on Rubio recently. To me, these form a pattern of "dishonesty" unparalleled among all campaigns.

Note that an avid Cruz supporter on the forum (BOSS) argued that those dirty tricks were not from Cruz himself, and that Cruz had zero control over what his PACs did, therefore he should not be blamed. I will leave the readers of the thread to decide whether Cruz should be held responsible.

Marco Rubio
He was my favorite candidate before Trump jumped in. He is young and energetic, with a pretty good resume and an inspiring life story. He is much quicker and smarter than Jeb (which is, in my opinion, totally incompetent), and he has a good memory. Also, he is more moderate and open minded compared to Cruz, something appealing to an independent like myself.

What concerns me most about Rubio is his "unusual reaction" against pressure. He sweats like a nervous kid, recites well-prepared debate responses like a robot, and melted down in an inexcusable way against Christie. All of these are clearly signs of weakness. To me, this is much worse than disagreement on certain political positions, and it cannot be corrected in a short period of time. I do not think that someone who failed to stand the pressure of a TV debate can be trusted as the president of the United States. If he can be destroyed by Christie in a Republican debate, what can I expect of him going against leaders such as Putin or Xi? Can I count on him to fight for the American people's best interest against pressure from the Congress and other countries around the world? Rubio might become a successful leader given more time, but now he just doesn't seem ready for the job.

I'd be happy to learn more about your opinions on these two candidates (why do you like/dislike them). However, please refrain yourselves from personal attacks -- we've had enough on TV!

I want to take you to task on several of your comments.

First... What do you define as "very conservative"? Do you mean adhering to our Constitution and first principles of the Bill of Rights? Do you mean standing up for religious liberty against progressive seculars who wish to destroy it? Do you not understand that these are pillars of conservatism that embody the whole of conservatism and make it a relevant political philosophy?

There is NO compromise or negotiation to be found with people who are pushing a leftist secular socialist agenda. You cannot compromise with radicals. What you get is a never-ending game of backing up, backing down, backing up some more. That's NOT a winning strategy.

Second... You CONTINUE to insist that Cruz "campaign team" has done all these unethical things... but you simply ignore the point that it's NOT his team or his campaign, it is the PACs who support him who have done things... Him firing his communications director is NOT a sign of his unethical behavior, it is a sign of his integrity and honor... He FIRED HIM! If he had cheered him and applauded him... THAT would be unethical. So you are taking an action he took in direct response to something he felt was wrong, and blaming him for the wrong.

At the same time, you have Rubio out there telling outright LIES about his support for amnesty! He was a Tea Party Conservative who got elected with a huge support from "very conservative" people whom he promised he'd fight for in Washington, and he simply sold them down the river with the Gang of 8 and reneged on his promise. Now, he is running away from that and insisting that people are telling lies on him. And you have Trump out there calling Ben Carson everything short of a pedophile.... he's damaged... he's got pathological disease, like a child molester! But that apparently isn't the least bit "unethical" in your opinion. So Rubio gets to lie through his teeth, Trump gets to smear people with nasty and disgusting innuendo... but Cruz is the bad guy because a PAC he has no control over sends out a mailer?

Now... A THINKING person might ask... WHO made the big deal out of the mailer? The answer is: The Establishment and the Media! You see... THEY don't like Cruz because Cruz is for smaller and more limited government, returning power to the people and states.... and this goes against the grain of establishment politicians in Washington. They don't want to give up their power. The Media doesn't want a smaller limited government either... they have correspondents and bureaus established inside the beltway... Sunday morning talk shows... pundits and analysts... all employed for the purpose of discussing and dissecting what the Big Government is doing. Cruz wants to make them less significant and they don't want to be made less significant. Ergo, they hate Cruz!

 

[Illya. K. Makrus]

He is crushing both of them in the polls. Not worried at all. Intelligent, honest, and principled will always beat ignorant, lying, and opportunistic head to head

Just for the record, Cruz tied with Clinton (+0.8) and lost to Sanders (-4.7) averagely on the head-to-head polls, not crushing them. (I hope I matched the pronouns in your post correctly). Below are links to a summary of relevant polls.
RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton
RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Cruz vs. Sanders
However, you can certainly argue that these numbers may be irrelevant since it's way too early in the race.

 

[OKTexas]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

Cruz is indeed ideological. The problem is that he's on the far right. Let's say that he gets the nomination. It's difficult to imagine anybody from the left or a vast majority of the independent supporting Cruz. Are you concerned that he might not be able to defeat Clinton or Sanders in the general election?

Don't you find it a bit strange that someone who believes in the Constitution and the values of the majority of Americans is considered an extremest?

 

[OKTexas]

He is crushing both of them in the polls. Not worried at all. Intelligent, honest, and principled will always beat ignorant, lying, and opportunistic head to head

I don't think the hildabitch will be a factor in the general election, she'll be too busy trying to avoid dressing in an orange jumpsuit every day.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"conservative values"

An oxymoron if there ever was one.

Unfortunately what conservatives 'value' is intolerance, contempt for sound, responsible governance, and implementing their failed, wrongheaded dogma hostile to the rule of law.

Seeking to criminalize homosexuality is not a 'value,' seeking to deny women their right to privacy is not a 'value,' and seeking to conjoin church and state in violation of the First Amendment is clearly not a 'value.'

The last thing America needs is conservative 'values.'

 

[Illya. K. Makrus]

First... What do you define as "very conservative"? Do you mean adhering to our Constitution and first principles of the Bill of Rights? Do you mean standing up for religious liberty against progressive seculars who wish to destroy it? Do you not understand that these are pillars of conservatism that embody the whole of conservatism and make it a relevant political philosophy?
Generally, Cruz himself is a great definition of "very conservative". I'm sure a lot of people disagree with Cruz on many issues (especially social issues). For example, gay rights, abortion, etc. Cruz may have constitutional support in some of those issues, however, a lot of the issues remain to be debated. Conservatism, after all, is just a set of beliefs held by a portion of the people in our country. I do not think every conservative belief is appropriate for our country, or justifiable by the constitution.

There is NO compromise or negotiation to be found with people who are pushing a leftist secular socialist agenda. You cannot compromise with radicals. What you get is a never-ending game of backing up, backing down, backing up some more. That's NOT a winning strategy.
I happen to believe that in a country with diversified ideas, the only way to move forward is to make good deals. Sometimes we stick with what we want, sometimes we BOTH need to back down. Always acting like a rock may look good, but it doesn't solve any problem.

Second... You CONTINUE to insist that Cruz "campaign team" has done all these unethical things... but you simply ignore the point that it's NOT his team or his campaign, it is the PACs who support him who have done things... Him firing his communications director is NOT a sign of his unethical behavior, it is a sign of his integrity and honor... He FIRED HIM! If he had cheered him and applauded him... THAT would be unethical. So you are taking an action he took in direct response to something he felt was wrong, and blaming him for the wrong.

At the same time, you have Rubio out there telling outright LIES about his support for amnesty! He was a Tea Party Conservative who got elected with a huge support from "very conservative" people whom he promised he'd fight for in Washington, and he simply sold them down the river with the Gang of 8 and reneged on his promise. Now, he is running away from that and insisting that people are telling lies on him. And you have Trump out there calling Ben Carson everything short of a pedophile.... he's damaged... he's got pathological disease, like a child molester! But that apparently isn't the least bit "unethical" in your opinion. So Rubio gets to lie through his teeth, Trump gets to smear people with nasty and disgusting innuendo... but Cruz is the bad guy because a PAC he has no control over sends out a mailer?
There you go. No more comments because we've discussed this for long enough, and there's nothing new and interesting. lol.

Now... A THINKING person might ask... WHO made the big deal out of the mailer? The answer is: The Establishment and the Media! You see... THEY don't like Cruz because Cruz is for smaller and more limited government, returning power to the people and states.... and this goes against the grain of establishment politicians in Washington. They don't want to give up their power. The Media doesn't want a smaller limited government either... they have correspondents and bureaus established inside the beltway... Sunday morning talk shows... pundits and analysts... all employed for the purpose of discussing and dissecting what the Big Government is doing. Cruz wants to make them less significant and they don't want to be made less significant. Ergo, they hate Cruz!
I think you get a point in accusing the media of working for the establishment. However, frauds are out, period. The MSM may have whatever intention, but facts are facts. The voters will decide whether Cruz is responsible.

BTW, it seems to me that we have quite different expectations from this thing. Your want to change what others think (particularly on Cruz), while I expect only to share my views and to understand others'. You've taken a quite challenging task through a not-so-efficient channel, "boss"...

 

[Illya. K. Makrus]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

Cruz is indeed ideological. The problem is that he's on the far right. Let's say that he gets the nomination. It's difficult to imagine anybody from the left or a vast majority of the independent supporting Cruz. Are you concerned that he might not be able to defeat Clinton or Sanders in the general election?

Don't you find it a bit strange that someone who believes in the Constitution and the values of the majority of Americans is considered an extremest?

By "believing in the Constitution", you actually mean believing in your interpretation of the constitution. Now we have a problem: our interpretation do not agree! Therefore, if your interpretation is "extreme", you will be called an extremest!
Also, how do you know that the conservative values Cruz defends are the values of the majority of Americans? Any evidence? Thoughts?

 

[eagle1462010]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

Cruz is indeed ideological. The problem is that he's on the far right. Let's say that he gets the nomination. It's difficult to imagine anybody from the left or a vast majority of the independent supporting Cruz. Are you concerned that he might not be able to defeat Clinton or Sanders in the general election?

Don't you find it a bit strange that someone who believes in the Constitution and the values of the majority of Americans is considered an extremest?

By "believing in the Constitution", you actually mean believing in your interpretation of the constitution. Now we have a problem: our interpretation do not agree! Therefore, if your interpretation is "extreme", you will be called an extremest!
Also, how do you know that the conservative values Cruz defends are the values of the majority of Americans? Any evidence? Thoughts?

Proud extremist here..............believe in the founding principles or our country..........

In their time, they were considered Radical Extremist's...............Traitors even.............Proud to be a part of that extreme outlook on our republic......................We have strayed from that and ignored their warnings on what will happen if we let the Federal Gov't get too big or decide that it is the answer to everyone's need for everything.

I suggest you get extreme as well and read the intent of the Founders..........here's a good place to start.
The Federalist Papers - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

 

[Illya. K. Makrus]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

Cruz is indeed ideological. The problem is that he's on the far right. Let's say that he gets the nomination. It's difficult to imagine anybody from the left or a vast majority of the independent supporting Cruz. Are you concerned that he might not be able to defeat Clinton or Sanders in the general election?

Don't you find it a bit strange that someone who believes in the Constitution and the values of the majority of Americans is considered an extremest?

By "believing in the Constitution", you actually mean believing in your interpretation of the constitution. Now we have a problem: our interpretation do not agree! Therefore, if your interpretation is "extreme", you will be called an extremest!
Also, how do you know that the conservative values Cruz defends are the values of the majority of Americans? Any evidence? Thoughts?

Proud extremist here..............believe in the founding principles or our country..........

In their time, they were considered Radical Extremist's...............Traitors even.............Proud to be a part of that extreme outlook on our republic......................We have strayed from that and ignored their warnings on what will happen if we let the Federal Gov't get too big or decide that it is the answer to everyone's need for everything.

I suggest you get extreme as well and read the intent of the Founders..........here's a good place to start.
The Federalist Papers - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Thank you!
Although I'm an independent, I tend to agree more with the conservatives.
However, I disagree with the conservatives on certain social issues (gay marriage, abortion, etc).

 

[OKTexas]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

Cruz is indeed ideological. The problem is that he's on the far right. Let's say that he gets the nomination. It's difficult to imagine anybody from the left or a vast majority of the independent supporting Cruz. Are you concerned that he might not be able to defeat Clinton or Sanders in the general election?

Don't you find it a bit strange that someone who believes in the Constitution and the values of the majority of Americans is considered an extremest?

By "believing in the Constitution", you actually mean believing in your interpretation of the constitution. Now we have a problem: our interpretation do not agree! Therefore, if your interpretation is "extreme", you will be called an extremest!
Also, how do you know that the conservative values Cruz defends are the values of the majority of Americans? Any evidence? Thoughts?

Wrong, I believe it means exactly what it says, as amended, no interpretation required. The law doesn't change based on opinion, that's why they write them down and not just pass them down person to person.

Also 85% of Americans consider themselves religious, and hold values consistent with their religions, Cruz is no different.

 

[Boss]

Generally, Cruz himself is a great definition of "very conservative". I'm sure a lot of people disagree with Cruz on many issues (especially social issues). For example, gay rights, abortion, etc. Cruz may have constitutional support in some of those issues, however, a lot of the issues remain to be debated. Conservatism, after all, is just a set of beliefs held by a portion of the people in our country. I do not think every conservative belief is appropriate for our country, or justifiable by the constitution.

On which of the issues you listed has the secular left been willing to compromise and negotiate? Where have they shown an interest in having an honest debate and reaching a mutual agreement? You need to try and understand what the liberal progressive agenda is all about. There is no compromise. There is no middle ground. There is not a point at which they are going to be satisfied and content that we have resolved the issues... it is a never-ending push for MORE. They beat weak minded people like you down... they make you think we can capitulate a little and everything will be okay... they take what you surrender and then they start immediately to push further. You will NEVER appease them.

Cruz stands for conservative constitutional original principles which simply do not change with the times. The principles of our constitution are as relevant today as they ever have been.

I happen to believe that in a country with diversified ideas, the only way to deal with a lot of issues is to make good deals. Sometimes we stick with what we want, sometimes we BOTH need to back down. Always acting like a rock may look good, but it doesn't solve any problem.

And this is a recipe for failure when dealing with radical liberal progressives. You can't make deals with them. They will take everything you give them and then immediately begin to press for what they didn't get. They have no intention of backing down... they never have... it's the epitome of what makes them liberal progressives... they are constantly marching forward with their agenda. The more you give in, the more ammunition they have to use against you, as you've admitted they were right and their complaint legitimate. If you want a real-world example, look at this "living wage" issue... it's been going on for 83 years. Are they satisfied? Hell no! They never will be!

There you go. No more comments because we've discussed this for long enough, and there's nothing new and interesting. lol.

No, there is nothing new or interesting because you remain stubbornly mired in your own illogical view that you cannot support with facts. You just continue to repeat the same propaganda you've been fed by the Establishment who are out to destroy Ted Cruz. So be it! That's what you're going to do no matter what anyone says or how much the dispel your argument.

I think you get a point in accusing the media of working for the establishment. However, frauds are out, period. The MSM may have whatever intention, but facts are facts. The voters will decide whether Cruz is responsible.

BTW, it seems to me that we have quite different expectations from this thing. Your want to change what others think (particularly on Cruz), while I expect only to share my views and to understand others'. You've taken a quite challenging task through a not-so-efficient channel, "boss"...

Well it looks like the voters are deciding based on the propaganda being fed to them by the media who is in the tank for the establishment. Damn straight I want to change what people think of Cruz because it's all based on lies and propaganda. I put out the challenge weeks ago for someone to show an example of a direct lie that Cruz has told... all I got was a link to a propaganda site with a list of "half-truths" where he may have gotten some details wrong on a few things but mostly a list of things other people have done or said and it's pinned on Cruz. Meanwhile, Trump and Rubio stand there and flat out lie through their teeth on things they've said that we have video evidence of them saying directly.

 

[Illya. K. Makrus]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

Cruz is indeed ideological. The problem is that he's on the far right. Let's say that he gets the nomination. It's difficult to imagine anybody from the left or a vast majority of the independent supporting Cruz. Are you concerned that he might not be able to defeat Clinton or Sanders in the general election?

Don't you find it a bit strange that someone who believes in the Constitution and the values of the majority of Americans is considered an extremest?

By "believing in the Constitution", you actually mean believing in your interpretation of the constitution. Now we have a problem: our interpretation do not agree! Therefore, if your interpretation is "extreme", you will be called an extremest!
Also, how do you know that the conservative values Cruz defends are the values of the majority of Americans? Any evidence? Thoughts?

Wrong, I believe it means exactly what it says, as amended, no interpretation required. The law doesn't change based on opinion, that's why they write them down and not just pass them down person to person.

Also 85% of Americans consider themselves religious, and hold values consistent with their religions, Cruz is no different.

Wrong, I believe it means exactly what it says, as amended, no interpretation required. The law doesn't change based on opinion, that's why they write them down and not just pass them down person to person.
If only we can unify our interpretation of the Constitution by writing it on paper... I know you didn't mean it, lol.
Also 85% of Americans consider themselves religious, and hold values consistent with their religions, Cruz is no different.
Really? Then why do we have so many liberals even on this forum?

 

[OKTexas]

First... What do you define as "very conservative"? Do you mean adhering to our Constitution and first principles of the Bill of Rights? Do you mean standing up for religious liberty against progressive seculars who wish to destroy it? Do you not understand that these are pillars of conservatism that embody the whole of conservatism and make it a relevant political philosophy?
Generally, Cruz himself is a great definition of "very conservative". I'm sure a lot of people disagree with Cruz on many issues (especially social issues). For example, gay rights, abortion, etc. Cruz may have constitutional support in some of those issues, however, a lot of the issues remain to be debated. Conservatism, after all, is just a set of beliefs held by a portion of the people in our country. I do not think every conservative belief is appropriate for our country, or justifiable by the constitution.

There is NO compromise or negotiation to be found with people who are pushing a leftist secular socialist agenda. You cannot compromise with radicals. What you get is a never-ending game of backing up, backing down, backing up some more. That's NOT a winning strategy.
I happen to believe that in a country with diversified ideas, the only way to move forward is to make good deals. Sometimes we stick with what we want, sometimes we BOTH need to back down. Always acting like a rock may look good, but it doesn't solve any problem.

Second... You CONTINUE to insist that Cruz "campaign team" has done all these unethical things... but you simply ignore the point that it's NOT his team or his campaign, it is the PACs who support him who have done things... Him firing his communications director is NOT a sign of his unethical behavior, it is a sign of his integrity and honor... He FIRED HIM! If he had cheered him and applauded him... THAT would be unethical. So you are taking an action he took in direct response to something he felt was wrong, and blaming him for the wrong.

At the same time, you have Rubio out there telling outright LIES about his support for amnesty! He was a Tea Party Conservative who got elected with a huge support from "very conservative" people whom he promised he'd fight for in Washington, and he simply sold them down the river with the Gang of 8 and reneged on his promise. Now, he is running away from that and insisting that people are telling lies on him. And you have Trump out there calling Ben Carson everything short of a pedophile.... he's damaged... he's got pathological disease, like a child molester! But that apparently isn't the least bit "unethical" in your opinion. So Rubio gets to lie through his teeth, Trump gets to smear people with nasty and disgusting innuendo... but Cruz is the bad guy because a PAC he has no control over sends out a mailer?
There you go. No more comments because we've discussed this for long enough, and there's nothing new and interesting. lol.

Now... A THINKING person might ask... WHO made the big deal out of the mailer? The answer is: The Establishment and the Media! You see... THEY don't like Cruz because Cruz is for smaller and more limited government, returning power to the people and states.... and this goes against the grain of establishment politicians in Washington. They don't want to give up their power. The Media doesn't want a smaller limited government either... they have correspondents and bureaus established inside the beltway... Sunday morning talk shows... pundits and analysts... all employed for the purpose of discussing and dissecting what the Big Government is doing. Cruz wants to make them less significant and they don't want to be made less significant. Ergo, they hate Cruz!
I think you get a point in accusing the media of working for the establishment. However, frauds are out, period. The MSM may have whatever intention, but facts are facts. The voters will decide whether Cruz is responsible.

BTW, it seems to me that we have quite different expectations from this thing. Your want to change what others think (particularly on Cruz), while I expect only to share my views and to understand others'. You've taken a quite challenging task through a not-so-efficient channel, "boss"...

I know you're new, so just a small piece of advice, RED is reserved for the USMB Mods.

 

[eagle1462010]

There is definitely the perception by many (including me) that Rubio has peanut sized balls. He would probably be ok as President, but you never know. He does little to inspire confidence.

I am still supporting Cruz. He is very intelligent and stands on principle. I like that he is ideological and opposed to being a populist who sways with the breeze. As an ideologue you can predict how he will act on a variety of thing last and can hold him accountable. Of all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, he is the most logical and analytical in his positions. He can explain what he wants to do, why he wants to do it, how he is going to do it, and what the results will be. He is very lawyerly in his approach. To me, he employs a rational and well thought out approach that none of the other candidates seem to have. The rest appear to merely stake out their positions based on what they perceive will garner the most popular support.

Cruz is indeed ideological. The problem is that he's on the far right. Let's say that he gets the nomination. It's difficult to imagine anybody from the left or a vast majority of the independent supporting Cruz. Are you concerned that he might not be able to defeat Clinton or Sanders in the general election?

Don't you find it a bit strange that someone who believes in the Constitution and the values of the majority of Americans is considered an extremest?

By "believing in the Constitution", you actually mean believing in your interpretation of the constitution. Now we have a problem: our interpretation do not agree! Therefore, if your interpretation is "extreme", you will be called an extremest!
Also, how do you know that the conservative values Cruz defends are the values of the majority of Americans? Any evidence? Thoughts?

Proud extremist here..............believe in the founding principles or our country..........

In their time, they were considered Radical Extremist's...............Traitors even.............Proud to be a part of that extreme outlook on our republic......................We have strayed from that and ignored their warnings on what will happen if we let the Federal Gov't get too big or decide that it is the answer to everyone's need for everything.

I suggest you get extreme as well and read the intent of the Founders..........here's a good place to start.
The Federalist Papers - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Thank you!
Although I'm an independent, I tend to agree more with the conservatives.
However, I disagree with the conservatives on certain social issues (gay marriage, abortion, etc).

Disagreements on issues are part of the Republic. Which is why the Founders provided a system of Checks and Balances to the Tyranny that is sometimes associated with other forms of Gov't, such as a Pure Democracy................where 50% plus one dictate the policies to the 49% minus 1 which end in Civil War and domestic unrest.............

Where we have failed is allowing an establishment class access to the tax payers money where it was never intended.......................So now we have a ruling class not beholding to the people but to their Lobbyist for the money..............ending into corruption that our Founding Fathers warned us about..........in systems like Rome who were life long Politicians lining their pockets instead of protecting their people...............we are now falling for the fallacy of Rome.

To me, this is the main culprit of our economic and political decline................the leaders were supposed to be for the people and for a limited time................now as in Rome...........we are economically burning down the house.