The more one learns about Ted Cruz, the more they realize how awful he is.

[JakeStarkey]

Then it is good that it is backfiring on Cruz. Go PAC.

 

[basquebromance]

Cruz is nuts. HE'S NUTS! NUTS!

NUTS! NUTS! NUTS!

 

[basquebromance]

DON'T CHOOSE CRUZ! DON'T CHOOSE CRUZ! DON'T CHOOSE CRUZ!

 

[basquebromance]

TED CRUZ WAS A SUPPORTER OF LEGALIZING PEOPLE THAT WERE HERE ILLEGALLY.

 

[basquebromance]

 

[Toro]

Now, going back to when Cruz was 18 years old, he wanted to ... rule the world

Well, who didn't?

 

[Toro]

Trump supporters had a flashback to high school when they saw that!

 

[jon_berzerk]

he is awful

 

[Locke11_21]

Cruz is not acceptable. The Senate would go Dem 56 to 44, and the House would be in jeopardy. If Cruz got the nomination, I think Bloomberg would step in as the centrist alternative.

It's hard to say if the Senate would go that way or not, same with the house.

As for Bloomberg, before that radical lunatic, Bill DeBlasio got elected, I would've completely disagreed with you on his being centrist. Compared to DeBlasio, Bloomberg is definitely more to the center. I give Bloomberg credit for keeping Manhattan safe in a similar manner to what Guliani did. I still don't see Bloomberg as centrist, but more left-center.

Unfortunately, we have a lot of terrible people, Democrats and Republicans holding positions of power. They lie to the faces of their constituents, then stab them in the back and serve special interests, big world bankers and greedy mega-corporations.

 

[SwimExpert]

The more one learns about Ted Cruz, the more one realizes how awful he is.

I actually doubt this is true. At least, it is only true for dumb people, at best. How horrible Ted Cruz is has been apparently for a long time, and there is nothing more to be learned about him to verify the fact.

Your attack on grammar is a weak attempt at trying to hide the fact that you have nothing of value to contribute to this forum.

Attack on grammar? No. The fact is that there is a lower boundary of technical accuracy below which language is no longer intelligible, except through mutual slop. You are approaching that boundary.

I am not attacking your grammar. I am attacking your lack of intellect by pointing out two demonstrations thereof; specifically that you are just now figuring out "how awful" Ted Cruz is, as well as the fact that you are just barely communicating in a human form.

 

[SwimExpert]

You repeatedly defend the greatest phony, coward, liar, scoundrel in president history

Let me guess....you're talking about Obama. If so, I don't defend him. What I do is to tell people to SHUT THE FUCK UP when all they've got is the kind of stupid shit you're saying. Because there are so many better ways to criticize the man. Stupidity like yours is what got Obama re-elected. Trailer trash like you convinced reasonably minded undecided voters that opposing Obama was something low class morons did. Because all you could produce was the type of rabble that only a low class piece of trash could ever think up.

and voted for him twice! --- and you are going to tell us what "horrible" means?

If by "twice" you mean "never" than sure.

 

[Missourian]

Nothing wrong with Cruz. The only point I make against him is, he can't expand the electoral map. Can Cruz be competitive in Pennsylvania...New Jersey...New Hampshire...Michigan...Colorado?

I don't think so...and if you are honest with yourselves, you don't either.

Let's take a look at the electoral map...

Here is the generic toss-up map from 270towin(.)com:

Here is the best case scenario for Cruz:

And here is the best case scenario for Trump:

 

[basquebromance]

 

[turzovka]

You repeatedly defend the greatest phony, coward, liar, scoundrel in president history

Let me guess....you're talking about Obama. If so, I don't defend him. What I do is to tell people to SHUT THE FUCK UP when all they've got is the kind of stupid shit you're saying. Because there are so many better ways to criticize the man. Stupidity like yours is what got Obama re-elected. Trailer trash like you convinced reasonably minded undecided voters that opposing Obama was something low class morons did. Because all you could produce was the type of rabble that only a low class piece of trash could ever think up.

and voted for him twice! --- and you are going to tell us what "horrible" means?

If by "twice" you mean "never" than sure.

I am so honored to put a check mark in your column for having proven me wrong. You win.

My error is that from faint memory it seems every thread I’ve recall you on, I am in the opposition, so I boldly assumed you had to be solid left, esp. if you think Cruz is horrible as well. And man did that cause a sensitive retort. Seriously?

 

[bodecea]

Cruz has not the moral character to be president of the US.

Agreed. I'd say the same about not having the moral character to be a Senator....except he's from Texas............

 

[SwimExpert]

My error is that from faint memory it seems every thread I’ve recall you on, I am in the opposition

That's what happens when you say stupid shit. You get called out by me. If you bothered to pay attention, you'd notice that I do not discriminate in the slightest when it comes to calling people out for falsity, poor reasoning, and/or stupidity. I can agree with someone's position 100% but if they use a foolish argument to support it, there's a good chance I'm going to call it out. Especially when it appears to be malicious or deliberate stupidity.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Cruz has not the moral character to be president of the US.

Agreed. I'd say the same about not having the moral character to be a Senator....except he's from Texas............

That's because Cruz has the same 38% that make up evangelical voters in this state that Perry did. That means they only needed about 20% of the remaining 62% of the voters.

 

[Locke11_21]

The more one learns about Ted Cruz, the more one realizes how awful he is.

I actually doubt this is true. At least, it is only true for dumb people, at best. How horrible Ted Cruz is has been apparently for a long time, and there is nothing more to be learned about him to verify the fact.

Your attack on grammar is a weak attempt at trying to hide the fact that you have nothing of value to contribute to this forum.

Attack on grammar? No. The fact is that there is a lower boundary of technical accuracy below which language is no longer intelligible, except through mutual slop. You are approaching that boundary.

I am not attacking your grammar. I am attacking your lack of intellect by pointing out two demonstrations thereof; specifically that you are just now figuring out "how awful" Ted Cruz is, as well as the fact that you are just barely communicating in a human form.

If you had a fraction of the intellect you think you have, instead of replying with insults like you have, you would have simply stated that I have "evolved" in regards to Ted Cruz. Clearly you vastly overrate your intellect.

 

[SwimExpert]

If you had a fraction of the intellect you think you have

You mean, the 99.8 percentile which I've been clinically determined to have?

Numbnuts....

 

[OKTexas]

That Cruz has no business being president has been evident for quite some time.

Right, because he tries to keep his campaign promises, a politicians worst nightmare.