United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Let’s Be Serious About Ted Cruz From The Start: He’s Too Extreme And Too Disliked To Win
Source:
FiveThirtyEight Politics
URL Source: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features ... treme-and-too-disliked-to-win/
Published: Mar 23, 2015
Author: Harry Enten
Post Date: 2015-03-23 15:57:49 by Jameson
Keywords: cruz, extreme, disliked
Views: 23266
Comments: 151
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s newly minted presidential campaign is the media equivalent of a juicy rib-eye that robbers use to distract a guard dog during a heist. He’ll get a ton of media attention, and he’ll get to spread his message — which may be all that Cruz is after — but Cruz almost certainly has no shot of winning the nomination, according to every indicator that predicts success in presidential primaries. First, Cruz doesn’t have enough support from party bigwigs. To win the Republican or Democratic nomination, you need the backing of at least some of the party apparatus. At a minimum, your fellow party members shouldn’t hate you. Otherwise, you end up getting the Newt Gingrich 2012 treatment. That is, you get pounced on the moment you’re seen as a threat to win the nomination.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-109) not displayed.
.
.
.
#110. To: tomder55, A K A Stone (#96)
Certainly a no-brainer were the RAT opponent either Hitlery of that Faux Neo-millionaire squaw, Lizzie Borden.
Giddy-Up!
MOST liberal/Democrats will base their life philosophy and ethics on ....Blah, Blah, Blah So....what do you think MOST "People" will base their life philosophy and ethics on ...???
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
The your source states otherwise. I'm sure it was just a typo Hung up on the minutia of style instead of substance -- typical. Have you given ANY consideration to the continued lying myth by Democrats that Republicans are the "party of the rich"? Still, TC's point is made: The MAJORITY of billionaires are indeed Dems, aren't they? And at that, even those figures are sure to be fudged and skewed. ("...according to a POLITICO analysis of reports filed with the Federal Election Commission and Internal Revenue Service. ) The above fedgoob agencies are under complete partisan Dem control; NOT exactly trusted sources of these or ANY "official" numbers.
No, I'm just curious if the edification of the body of Christ you put on display here is typical of the members of your "church" - and reiterate that I'm glad I'm an infidel and not a member.
The ability of Fallible and Uninspired goons to assume dominion over the faith of others without having their errors contradicted.
There are two types of people (mostly): 1) Givers, who who base their lives on a definitive standard of ethics and morality based on "The Golden Rule" or God's Laws. 2) Takers, who generally disbelieve in moral absolutes, a lack of personal responsibility, and belief that the world (and others) owe them. And your own opinion on the matter?
No I've given that claim no consideration at all. My point was simple - The 2/3 claim was false. To your point: "...The MAJORITY of billionaires are indeed Dems, aren't they?..." I believe that the MAJORITY of billionaires will support whomever promotes their particular agenda.
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
Your "curiosity" is disingenuous, Riddler. NEWSFLASH: members of the "body of Christ" are comprised of those who believe in Him, and of whom ask for repentance and receive redemption of their sins. Do you expect Jefferson to do the same? Btw, thanks for reiterating and re-displaying your infidel status as anti-Christ, AND re-kneeling at the edifice of Jefferson. You got called out. Plain and simple.
I believe that just about everyone will do what's best for them, in any given situation. I think that a strong majority would profess to be "givers"....and 99% of them would be lying.
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
ALL men are "falible," Riddler... But tell us -- exactly who are these "goons" who "assume dominion" over your faith? Have you been coerced by someone specifically, OR, has your Free Will been stolen?? Moreover, exactly to which "errors" do you refer?
That's a pretty general statement that fails to address ANY differences in philosophy of living between say, a Christian, a Muslim, and an Atheist. If what you believe is true, then why are all the Christian-based nations and societies the leaders in technical advancements, freedom, and the concepts of equality? I think that a strong majority would profess to be "givers"....and 99% of them would be lying. Not very aware of America's bustling charitable orgs, are you? Or the Christian ethos?
Affiliation with the Republican Party is neutralizing. The GOP gave us Roe and has upheld it and extended it. They gave us Kelo, amnesty, open borders, endless wars, etc. They're corrupt, and they never do what they say on any of the core issues. They say what they need to to get elected, and then they do what their crony capitalist controllers want. It's visible. It's been this way for a long, long time. There are conservatives who want things to be better. Things can never get better if conservatives remain in the GOP. They are divided and the GOP conquers them. It gets their votes and their money, thereby diluting all of that for any sort of EFFECTIVE action. The Republican Party ITSELF is the problem, and there will be no advance as long as conservatives remain in it.
Looked in the mirror lately? Religious state-establishments never have a shortage of good-ol-goons like you. You mean like your error of being too stupid to admit that human genitalia always present female form without the effects of Androgen hormones?
But maybe you should. It's the basis of the Dems' propaganda class warfare on Republicans. My point was simple - The 2/3 claim was false. There is such a thijg as "winning" by a technicality, but losing on principle. I believe that the MAJORITY of billionaires will support whomever promotes their particular agenda. So you believe ALL agendas the same?? And IF one agenda is to pretend they support the plight of the poor and middle class while destroying the same poor and middle class? (like most Democrats?)....then what? Certain candidates indeed DO actually make a difference. Look at Der Fuehrer, Hoosane B. 0dinga and his regime.
You are correct. I think that a strong majority would profess to be "givers"....and 99% of them would be lying. Not very aware of America's bustling charitable orgs, are you? Or the Christian ethos? I believe that just about everyone will do what's best for them, in any given situation.
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
Now, it's just sad. Just toss in the white towel, Riddler. You've been thoroughly thrashed.
People will instinctively and pragmatically act with self-preservation in mind, yes... But that still doesn't account for a "life-philosophy" or moral code.
You mean like your error of being too stupid to admit that human genitalia always present female form without the effects of Androgen hormones? "In a fetus without a Y chromosome — without the effects of male hormones — the genitals develop as female." www.mayoclinic.org/diseases- conditions/ambiguous-genitalia/basics/causes/con-20026345 What does this mean?
There is such a thing as "winning" by a technicality, but losing on principle. There sure is...however my point, as I said, was quite simple: The 2/3 claim was false. So you believe ALL agendas the same?? No. Certain candidates indeed DO actually make a difference. Agreed.
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
This is where we disagree, "...just about everyone will do what's best for them, in any given situation..." Is indeed a life-philosophy or moral code.
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
Because the GOP, since 1868, has been the party of capitalist stockjobbers whose profits are derived primarily from monopolistic government contracts. They produce goods and services for the government, they are given contracts without competition, and they get rich through long-term, stable feeding on the government payroll. This became the central power of the Republican Party with the wholly corrupt Administration of Ulysses S. Grant, following the Civil War, and it has never changed. What is most important to the core GOP is that the contracts remain stable. THAT is their alpha issue: very larger, permanent, non-competitive government contracts that take about a quarter of the treasury and transfer it to the contractors. For that to be stable and certain, the GOP must retain a certain level of power in Congress, as well as in the Civil Service. It was the GOP who made the Civil Service "professional" (in the Presidency of Chester Arthur), at a time when its ranks were completely Republican. As that waned with time, the GOP shifted and empowered cabinet secretaries and did other things. The Republicans don't need to control the whole government, and they don't need to control every agency. They need to control the big contracting agencies, the ones that hire the Halliburtons. And they need to have enough political clout that the Democrats in Congress and the rest of the Republicans will quietly concede the contracts to them, in exchange for everything else. That "everything else" is the game of retail politics. The GOP needs to retain sufficient popularity to get elected in sufficient numbers to keep the contract farm stable. To do that, they have to enthuse people with issues, but they're never serious about those issues, they always clutch up on the key pitches, because, in part, they don't care, and also because they don't WANT to win. For those executives and contributors who profit from the stockjobbing are not particularly conservative. They're to the left on most issues, but their bread is buttered through contracts and special tax clauses, so they use the GOP as their technical blocker and champion. Everything else doesn't matter as much, and Republicans will never die on the hills that conservatives want them to fight for. They will die for tax preferences and contract rights - THOSE things are esoteric, arranged quietly, and non-negotiable. The grand-standing issues like abortion? Conservatives care. Some Republican pols care. Other strike the pose to get the votes. The actual crony capitalists are socially liberal and will never let the GOP strike down abortion. They like the optionality for their own daughters and mistresses, and they concede this to their wives and their Harvard Club buddies. That's the way it is. It cannot change. The money and power bloc is solid, and lucrative. Politicians who protect it come through the revolving door and cash out throughout the rest of their lives. This is the REAL core GOP, and it's not going to change.
As to policy and executive experience, 0buma's "executive experince" was as a socialist, race-baiting. "Communtah Organizer." Didn't seem to bother the GOP. Or dopey voters. Let me clarify . My name for Obama is Emperor Zero and I often just say "the emperor " . In no way was I calling Cruz emperor like. I know Cruz's policies are a strict adherence to Constitutional principles.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Here's a good example of where our individual approaches don't align. I really don't care that the republicans and the democrats are in a constant state of petty conflict. It's childish, undignified, and should probably be regular feature on the Jerry Springer show.
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
...strategically dialectic.
Altruistic behavior is exhibited by many animals. Got Sex, Evolution and Behavior?
People like Willie and Jameson just come here to troll. As to the actual amount of billionaires, some billionaires may give or register with one party but only donate as though they are millionaires. So they might have billions but donate only in the tens of thousands. Then you have billionaires like Adelson or the Koch network or Soros who toss in tens of millions. Or you have some like Bloomberg that has a gungrabbing fetish and that controls the direction of their political spending. So it can be hard to quantify all the activities of these various billionaires in either party. That's before you even look at the secret-donor PACs. The tycoons are happy enough to let us have the vote as long as they have the money and can use it to buy up the pols we elect by various means.
Which leaves who? Christie, Kascich, Walker, or Jindal? The first three are compromised or moderates, and Jindal -- though a good man -- isn't forceful enough (IMHO.) I fail to see where Walker is either compromised or moderate . He also has had the courage to take the best shots the Democrat storm troopers can give ,and remain standing . So he would be my first choice . Rick Perry would probably be my 2nd choice of eligible governors . He also has the advantage to being one of the few GOP candidates who served in the military . Also would like to give kudos to Susana Martinez ,and ,Nikki Haley. Yes I'm sure there are issues with each of them and they aren't as ideologically pure . Be careful of overly rigid litmus tests . There are some Founding Fathers who would fall short .
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
I have. Leave the Republican Party and form a new one. There are no Good Nazis. Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. There are pro-life Democrat dupes too. They also believe that they can influence things in that party. They're wrong.
Name these pro-life Dems. I think they're imaginary, part of your they-all-do-it fairy tales. They don't actually exist since they have no choice but to vote Dem, no matter what.
I had a discussion with one of my customers today and that was his view, "Bi- partisanship" was the way to go. (It took all the will power I had to not laugh out loud). So I said if you know you're right about something do you back down from your decision/opinion and give into something you know is wrong??? Needless to say it got real quiet.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
I hope you aren't expecting a cognitive response.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
So how many laws/executive orders have the Democraps/Obozo passed/made that benefited the rich and not the average Joe during Obozo's 2 terms?? Oh wait never mind that would blow some peoples minds if they knew the truth. Maybe they will do everybody a favor and.... “Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Now is the hour to unite, long before the primary begins. If we unite behind one candidate, we can defeat the RINO du jour. Unity up front is key. It is put up or shut up time, indeed.
http://www.tedcruz.org
On this issue, I believe he has expressed what he thinks. Blacks voting 95+ percent for Dems, regardless of candidate or what the party does for them, is less productive than making political demands which, if not met, result in a group shift to the opposition. He did not so much express approval of the wonders of the GOP but disapproval of bootlicking devotion to the Dems.
According to the moderate party PTB, their way is the answer. The failing was in the campaign of the candidate getting the wonderful message out. The same corporate money fuels the Dem and GOP national organizations. Go figure. In the football season, the AFC and NFC hold primaries to choose their candidate to fight for the prize in the Super Bowl. And the winner is... the NFL. They own both conferences. Corporate money owns both parties. Regardless of who wins, they own them. Don’t forget Marco Rubio. He is an effective speaker, hispanic, and does not carry as much baggage as Bush or Cruz. It is too early to tell if he will gain any traction. I see Kasich and Walker as potentially viable GOP candidates. I have previously noted that Cruz should not be underestimated. He excels at debate. He is, however, the most polarizing of the potential GOP candidates. On the Dem side, I doubt Hillary will prevail. While Elizabeth Warren may be left of Obama, she is popular, she is a woman, and she excels at debate. She could excite a cult following like 2008 Obama did. Remember those unreal crowds? Hillary is the same polarizing figure she was in 2008.
Hillary is the same polarizing figure she was in 2008. Completely agree . Evita was not the inevitable candidate in 2008 ,and she isn't now either .....and Elizabeth Warren is no William T Sherman despite her protests about not throwing her hat in the ring.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
That's before you even look at the secret-donor PACs. I don't think you could ever figure out "Who gave how much to who", too many ways to hide "Who's" money it is.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
They exist. Up here in Connecticut the "Democrats for Life" contact me every election cycle. I challenge them on babies versus party, and they always hedge. The political animal always places party before God. I am no more persuaded by the Democrat liars than the Republicans. Both are dupes.
In a leaked propaganda directive to 50 Cent Party internet commentators, their objective was stated as:[27][28] In order to circumscribe the influence of Taiwanese democracy, in order to progress further in the work of guiding public opinion, and in accordance with the requirements established by higher authorities to “be strategic, be skilled,” we hope that internet commentators conscientiously study the mindset of netizens, grasp international developments, and better perform the work of being an internet commentator. For this purpose, this notice is promulgated as set forth below: (1) To the extent possible make America the target of criticism. Play down the existence of Taiwan. (2) Do not directly confront [the idea of] democracy; rather, frame the argument in terms of “what kind of system can truly implement democracy.” (3) To the extent possible, choose various examples in Western countries of violence and unreasonable circumstances to explain how democracy is not well-suited to capitalism. (4) Use America’s and other countries’ interference in international affairs to explain how Western democracy is actually an invasion of other countries and [how the West] is forcibly pushing [on other countries] Western values. (5) Use the bloody and tear-stained history of a [once] weak people [i.e., China] to stir up pro-Party and patriotic emotions. (6) Increase the exposure that positive developments inside China receive; further accommodate the work of maintaining [social] stability.[27][28] Change a few words here and there and you have the Democraps version. It makes me laugh to know they are expending so much energy here at LF when nobody believes what they say anyway. LOL...
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
A good beginning would be competence.
Comments (151 - 151) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latestif a Scott Walker is selected rather than a Ted Cruz. That's who I'll vote for .
#111. To: A K A Stone (#108)
#112. To: Liberator (#97)
MOST conservatives/Republicans WILL base their life philosophy and ethics on ....Blah, Blah, Blah
#113. To: Jameson, TooConservative (#109)
(Edited)
You said 2/3 of the Billionaires support Democrats...
#114. To: Liberator (#94)
Suddenly you're insulted and offended
#115. To: Liberator (#93)
(Edited)
Killing the infection of WHAT then?
#116. To: Jameson (#112)
So....what do you think MOST "People" will base their life philosophy and ethics on ...???
#117. To: Liberator, TooConservative (#113)
Have you given ANY consideration to the continued lying myth by Democrats that Republicans are the "party of the rich"?
#118. To: VxH (#114)
I'm just curious if the edification of the body of Christ you put on display here is typical of the members of your "church"...
#119. To: Liberator (#116)
And your own opinion on the matter?
#120. To: VxH (#115)
The ability of Fallible and Uninspired goons to assume dominion over the faith of others without having their errors contradicted.
#121. To: Jameson (#119)
(Edited)
I believe that just about everyone will do what's best for them, in any given situation.
#122. To: Liberator (#98)
ALL Republics/conservatives as "Good Germans" when its conservative battling for Life and Liberty EVERY day. Or are you??
#123. To: Liberator (#120)
(Edited)
But tell us -- exactly who are these "goons" who "assume dominion" over your faith?
Moreover, exactly to which "errors" do you refer?
#124. To: Jameson (#117)
No I've given that claim no consideration at all [to the continued lying myth by Democrats that Republicans are the "party of the rich"?]
#125. To: Liberator (#121)
That's a pretty general statement that fails to address ANY differences in philosophy of living between say, a Christian, a Muslim, and an Atheist.
#126. To: VxH (#123)
#127. To: Jameson (#125)
I believe that just about everyone will do what's best for them, in any given situation.
#128. To: Liberator (#126)
(Edited)
Moreover, exactly to which "errors" do you refer?
Maybe you should just stick with "HUH?", Idiot.
#129. To: Liberator (#124)
#130. To: Liberator (#127)
But that still doesn't account for a "life-philosophy" or moral code.
#131. To: Liberator (#106)
THEN when it actually does win, the GOP yields to Dem politics and policy. Go figure.
#132. To: Liberator (#106)
Well, visionaries are like that -- he's not shy about articulating his positions without the usual reservations or hedging of bets. That may come off as "emperor"-like, but make no mistake -- as we have seen, "emperors" don't usually pay much attention to the Constitution. Cruz DOES.
#133. To: Liberator (#124)
But maybe you should. It's the basis of the Dems' propaganda class warfare on Republicans.
#134. To: Jameson (#133)
It's childish, undignified, and...
#135. To: Jameson (#130)
a life-philosophy or moral code.
#136. To: Liberator (#113)
#137. To: Liberator (#106)
If I were to go to the polls today and have to choose from the probable field ,I'd most likely go with a principled conservative governor (and the GOP bench has quite a few to choose from.)
#138. To: Liberator (#100)
(Edited)
Make up your mind.
#139. To: Vicomte13 (#138)
There are pro-life Democrat dupes too. They also believe that they can influence things in that party. They're wrong.
#140. To: Liberator (#101)
Because these people are brainwashed into believing in the propaganda of "fairness" of bi-partisanship, and "fairness" as enumerated in the US Constitution
#141. To: Liberator (#104)
#142. To: Liberator, Jameson (#124)
#143. To: jeremiad (#49)
Either we turn the "ship of state" around or we follow the marxists in the Democrat party into the "hell on Earth" they always create. Ted Cruz is a chance at snatching victory from defeat, instead of the usual script of losing when a real chance at winning presents itself.
#144. To: Liberator (#95)
I don't really know exactly what he thinks.
#145. To: Liberator, tomder55, redleghunter (#106)
[Tomder55 #87] The way I see it is that we have tried moderate party establishment types with Romney McCain ,and before that Bob Dole. Didn't work out so well.
[Liberator #106] THEN when it actually does win, the GOP yields to Dem politics and policy. Go figure.
[Liberator #106] Which leaves who? Christie, Kascich, Walker, or Jindal?
#146. To: nolu chan (#145)
On the Dem side, I doubt Hillary will prevail. While Elizabeth Warren may be left of Obama, she is popular, she is a woman, and she excels at debate. She could excite a cult following like 2008 Obama did. Remember those unreal crowds?
#147. To: TooConservative (#136)
So it can be hard to quantify all the activities of these various billionaires in either party.
#148. To: TooConservative (#139)
(Edited)
Name these pro-life Dems. I think they're imaginary, part of your they-all-do-it fairy tales. They don't actually exist
#149. To: TooConservative, Liberator (#136)
People like Willie and Jameson just come here to troll.
#150. To: Pericles (#88)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]