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: 24037
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 (1-37) not displayed.
.
.
.
#38. To: A K A Stone (#36)
well, yeah of course.... but in the short term....will you vote for Bush?
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
And a vote for another NWO Bush is different than a Dem....HOW??
Will you vote for a Dem over a Pubbie in any case?
By then? "It's dead, Jim."
Well, I wish Cruz well. I'd like to see him become the Republican nominee. I might even vote in the primary and then come out in the general election, hold my nose, and vote Republican in the general election, if he's the guy. That'd be swell. I don't believe that the Republicans will nominate him, because he is much closer to me on many issues than Republicans are. It's their party, and they're going to nominate somebody who represents their values, not somebody who represents mine.
I won't vote for either. Democrats are exultant babykillers. Republicans are corrupt crony capitalist incompetents.
If not 2040 and later. Cruz will only be 45 in 2016, I think. 65 in 2036. 75 in 2046. Cruz could easily be giving rockribbed Republicans heart attacks until mid-century. If the GOP always nominates "the guy from last time", that is a lot of "last times" for Cruz to have a chance at.
This cult of personality is weird for me to accept belongs with Republican politics - it makes sense in the world of talk show hosts and their fans - but for politics it is weird.
Yes, of course. I have voted for republicans, democrats, libertarians, non-affiliated.....etc it all depends on the circumstances at that time... I have also chosen to not vote in some races - if none of the candidates are worthy.
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
I agree - self proclaimed messiahs declaring they can cause sea levels to fall, which in turn causes spasmatic fainting spells does seem to be more a democrat thing. Maybe at the next democrat rally we can see a reprise of the Lords' first miracle - though instead of turning water into wine perhaps Zero can turn ordinary cigarettes into reefers?
It depends on one's viewpoint. The mission of the Party PTB is to (1) protect their position as the Party PTB and (2) elect one of their own as President. By nominating and electing any conservative such as Ted Cruz, the moderate Party PTB would risk being replaced by conservatives. By nominating a moderate, they ensure that no conservative has any claim to fame demonstrating the lack of merit in their moderate or liberal policies. Their primary motivation is to remain in control of the levers of power within the party. That purpose is better served by a losing Ford, Dole, McCain, Romney, or the like, than a winning conservative. The corporate donors do not care if conservatives stay home. Big business likes big government. The two parties in D.C. are in the business of selling tax breaks and government contracts. Big business are the buyers. The American taxpayer pays the bill.
Those are code words for compromising your principles. McConnell and Boehner do that consistently, along with a good sized chunk of the GOP officials. 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. Either Republicans nominate a Constitutional conservative, or all that is left of the mess will be the wiping of our collective ass after we take the dump. There are millions of conservatives waiting for a true leader. Bush won't cut it, and Huckabee can't. Unless the party stands for its stated principles, we may win an office, but we lose the country. Truly, R vs D is about who gets to dole out the trillions and who gets the rewards of the graft. We either work to support what we SAY we want, or we are no better than the progressive/liberal/marxist/totalitarian left.
It happens. I grow on people like a fungus.
Pardon the raucous laughter Pericles.... Perhaps you missed the coronation of the Der Mezziah in 2008. He came with his own assortment of temple idols as well: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
Politics is about compromise - see the Founding Fathers and that compromised document called the "Constitution". You are describing a religous order not a political party.
Perhaps you missed the coronation of the Der Mezziah in 2008. He came with his own assortment of temple idols as well: I said it is odd for Republicans. Just because Democrats do it does not mean it is right or proper for Republicans to do it. I found your response weird - because the Dems fawned over Obama (I think the romance has ended between the Dems and Obama) the Repubs should do the same?
"Republican politics"?? Hey look! 0buma is a Greek god!!" Did he turn water into wine for his cultists-of-personality at this epically weird function?
Ok. I'm going to ease up on you. Anyone with that slogan can't be all bad. The Riddler ripped the slogan off.
Sorry, your wording was a bit unclear at what you were getting at...
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
That'd be swell. Glad you're somewhat encouraged. I know -- it's hard. I don't believe that the Republicans will nominate him, because he is much closer to me on many issues than Republicans are. It's their party, and they're going to nominate somebody who represents their values, not somebody who represents mine. He's closer on more issues with MORE people than any candidate out there; the media and puppet pundits won't admit that. The question is to what extent the NWO establishment whores, puppets and elites quash and sabotage Cruz's campaign. He'll roll back a lot of recent regulations, over-officiousness, Statism, and fascism if he succeeds.
Well stated. THIS is the Final and Last chance for the Republic.
Dems are also corrupt crony capitalist incompetents. BUT WORSE. Moreover, at least a good 50% of Pubbies are pro-Life, whereas, 0% of Dems are.
Actually, you are an actually incurable communicable disease.
By nominating and electing any conservative such as Ted Cruz, the moderate Party PTB would risk being replaced by conservatives. By nominating a moderate, they ensure that no conservative has any claim to fame demonstrating the lack of merit in their moderate or liberal policies. Their primary motivation is to remain in control of the levers of power within the party. That purpose is better served by a losing Ford, Dole, McCain, Romney, or the like, than a winning conservative. The corporate donors do not care if conservatives stay home. Big business likes big government. The two parties in D.C. are in the business of selling tax breaks and government contracts. Big business are the buyers. The American taxpayer pays the bill. Best explanation of the party dynamics and political reality I've seen. It would also validate the notion that the USA is indeed no longer representative, constitutional Republic, but a farce, a charade.
Atta boy! Standing on the principles of quicksand, and casting your vote on which way the wind happens to be blowing.
And hopefully roll back a lot of 'satanism.' The next GOP nominee must come out strong on protecting human life in the womb. Not just words as 'words are just wind' but with a plan of action.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
Sometimes a bright light has to shine to scatter the cockroaches. Cruz gave us some of that light yesterday. More to follow to see if he throws back the entire curtain to let the light in. Also, will the comatose American electorate even comprehend such light? The very soul of this nation is at stake.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
Yep. And this is exactly why the establishment RNC, DNC, PTB, Hollywood, and liberal media all fear Cruz. Also, will the comatose American electorate even comprehend such light? Depends on how effective the propaganda and character assassination is. The very soul of this nation is at stake. Definitely on the line for 2016. No one but Cruz shakes things up the way they need to be shaken.
Heh...(goes without saying. Wouldn't want to be accused of "intolerance" toward satanists.) The next GOP nominee must come out strong on protecting human life in the womb. Not just words as 'words are just wind' but with a plan of action. I agree on its merit, but I don't see that issue creating a tactical advantage during the campaign. Let's win first, then (like the Dems) start lowering the boom on moral issues, like preborn-murder by either reinforcing States' Rights, dismissing Leftist circuit court judges, and thru conservative SCOTUS appointments.
No, they're not worse. They're just different. The Republicans gave us Roe v. Wade and Casey, O'Connor, Kennedy and Souter. And Kelo. And by not filibustering, they also gave us Ginsburg and Kagan and Sotomayor, etc. The Democrats would have filibustered people like that (coming in the other direction). Republicans don't. They enable. Which means they're every bit as bad. Also, Republicans lose wars.
Words are wind, and the Republicans are windbags. It's nice to have Cruz in the ring, but I wouldn't get my hopes up.
Heh heh....you bet. Actually I really don't care much for political parties or labels like "conservative" or "liberal" This style thinking is limiting, divisive, and antique. IMHO
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
And by not filibustering, they also gave us Ginsburg and Kagan and Sotomayor, etc. Yes, I hear ya, but you're making the mistake of confusing the RNC statist stranglehold on the GOP with the rest of the party. Do you think the Bushes, Dole, Romney, Boehner, McConnell, Lott, McCain, Graham, etal are just coincidental faces of the GOP? They run powerful committees and bury conservative Pubbies from power in the Senate/House.
I guess you don't much care for defining a person or party by their respective words, deeds, actions, life philosophy, or agendas either. That's the reason for party or labels, aka "branding." This style thinking is limiting, divisive, and antique. IMHO It's a necessary means of discernment or judgment. Is in your opinion discernment or judgement....irrelevant?
When they do, blame it on those who are in power and their corruption and loyalty to their industrial/banking/globalist Puppetmeister interests. You'll note Reagan forged ZERO wars during his eight years in office.
Outspoken Black ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith had some interesting commentary in an address at Vanderbilt University in which he opined that he would like to see Blacks, in just one election, all vote Republican. That would be a wakeup call for the liberals. The Black vote is taken for granted by the Dems. ESPN analyst Stephen A. Smith reaffirmed his view that African Americans should stop monolithically supporting Democrats in every election and instead make both major parties compete for their vote. The often flamboyant Smith is perhaps best known for his intense and some would say obnoxious back-and-forth with the equally outspoken Skip Bayless on First Take, which airs five mornings a week on ESPN. Smith, a registered independent, has been inching his way into commentary about politics and other social issues. You may also remember that ESPN suspended him last year for controversial comments about domestic violence. He recently found himself engulfed in another controversy, this time over comments made about the NFL Philadelphia Eagles. Stephen A. subsequently rejected any racial basis for his criticism of head coach Chip Kelly’s personnel decisions. Earlier this week, in a Vanderbilt University symposium, Smith proposed that every black American vote Republican in one election. In his speech, he also correctly noted that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would never have passed without the support of Republican U.S. senators. In fact, Republican votes in the chamber were necessary to overcome a filibuster conducted by, among others, Sen. Robert Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat, who was also a former KKK member. In an interview with CNN, Smith returned to the subject of bloc voting by blacks. He insisted that Democrats take the black vote for granted, a phenomenon which the black community has allowed, while Republicans ignore the black vote because they feel it is pointless to go after it. Democrats have successfully demonized the GOP such that “we look at the Republican party, I’m not talking about every single one of us, of course, but the vast majority of black Americans look at the Republican party as the enemy; we look at the Democratic party, even tacitly, as our support base, and as a result, we are very transparent in our support for them,” Smith declared. The typical result of this historical voting trend is that the Democrats have a license to take African Americans for granted, while the Republicans have a license to summarily dismiss that same community, Stephen A. Smith explained. Against this backdrop, the ESPN and Sirius XM host and former Philadelphia Inquirer columnist observed that both political parties are competing for the Hispanic vote, which, in contrast, is considered up for grabs. During the exchange, he also denied that he was advocating for a further balkanization of American politics. In December, 2013, Smith said that “it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever” for the black community to ostracize black conservatives.
Actually I really don't care much for political parties or labels like "conservative" or "liberal" Maybe I wasn't clear, allow me to re-phrase... I don't believe that everyone who is identified as a "republican" (or other designation) will all respond or act in the same manner in any given situation. Everyone responds differently. The label or (party label) is irrelevant.
"we are tartets from evil doers!!!" [ and ] U looked up birfer on the dcitionary. It isn't a movie.
In 1943, there was no such thing as a "Good German".
Good find and interesting read. You have accomplished a great thing today:)
"For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." (John 1:17)
I'm not going to let the Republicans off the hook. There are no "Good Republicans". There are some people with good ideas and values who have mistakenly aligned themselves with the Republican Party. As long as they remain aligned with that party, they will be neutered and rendered ineffective by the corrupt crony capitalist contingent that has dominated that party since 1868. It's not going to change, ever, and I see no value in lying to myself and pretending that it will. The Democrats are babykillers and the Republicans are crapweasels. There may have been "Good Germans" by somebody's definition, somewhere, but it's 1943 and I'm a pilot over Germany: they're all bad. I'm not going to be discriminating, trying to find the good, because I don't care. They're the enemy, and they're all bad. Republicans and Democrats have been so consistently bad, for so long, they have exhausted any willingness on my part to expend any further energy trying to find kernels of edible corn in their poop. Crapweasels and babykillers. They can all go die in a hole and we would be better for it.
Comments (78 - 151) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest2020, 2024, 2028, 2032, 2036
#39. To: Jameson (#37)
in the short term....will you vote for Bush?
#40. To: Jameson (#37)
#41. To: A K A Stone (#36)
2020, 2024, 2028, 2032, 2036
#42. To: Liberator (#31)
That's too bad because unlike the other puppets, Cruz takes no prisoners and is small gubmint. He is the literal political anecdote to 0buma, which is why you're going to immediately see Cruz pounded from every direction until he's either left standing and stronger, OR too crippled to continue.
#43. To: Liberator (#40)
Will you vote for a Dem over a Pubbie in any case?
#44. To: A K A Stone, redleghunter (#36)
2020, 2024, 2028, 2032, 2036
#45. To: TooConservative, A K A Stone, redleghunter (#44)
#46. To: Liberator (#40)
Will you vote for a Dem over a Pubbie in any case?
#47. To: Pericles (#45)
This cult of personality is weird for me to accept belongs with Republican politics
#48. To: redleghunter, Jameson (#3)
Look at how those elections worked out for the GOP with moderates. Some conservatives stayed home and it showed in the results.
#49. To: Pericles (#17)
appeal to a broader audience
#50. To: A K A Stone (#15)
Ok. I'm going to ease up on you. Anyone with that slogan can't be all bad.
#51. To: Pericles, liberator, TooConservative, A K A Stone, VxH (#45)
This cult of personality is weird for me to accept belongs with Republican politics
#52. To: jeremiad (#49)
Those are code words for compromising your principles. McConnell and Boehner do that consistently, along with a good sized chunk of the GOP officials.
#53. To: redleghunter, , liberator, TooConservative, A K A Stone (#51)
This cult of personality is weird for me to accept belongs with Republican politics Pardon the raucous laughter Pericles....
#54. To: Pericles, Rufus T Firefly, redleghunter (#45)
This cult of personality is weird for me to accept belongs with Republican politics...
#55. To: A K A Stone, VxH (#15)
("Cruz or lose!")
#56. To: Pericles (#53)
#57. To: Vicomte13 (#42)
I wish Cruz well. I'd like to see him become the Republican nominee. I might even vote in the primary and then come out in the general election, hold my nose, and vote Republican in the general election, if he's the guy.
#58. To: jeremiad (#49)
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. Either Republicans nominate a Constitutional conservative, or all that is left of the mess will be the wiping of our collective ass after we take the dump.
#59. To: Vicomte13 (#43)
Democrats are exultant babykillers. Republicans are corrupt crony capitalist incompetents.
#60. To: VxH (#50)
I grow on people like a fungus.
#61. To: nolu chan (#48)
The mission of the Party PTB is to (1) protect their position as the Party PTB and (2) elect one of their own as President.
#62. To: Jameson (#46)
I have voted for republicans, democrats, libertarians, non-affiliated.....etc it all depends on the circumstances at that time...
#63. To: Liberator, Vicomte13 (#57)
He'll roll back a lot of recent regulations, over-officiousness, Statism, and fascism if he succeeds
#64. To: nolu chan, liberator, tomder55 (#48)
By nominating and electing any conservative such as Ted Cruz, the moderate Party PTB would risk being replaced by conservatives. By nominating a moderate, they ensure that no conservative has any claim to fame demonstrating the lack of merit in their moderate or liberal policies. Their primary motivation is to remain in control of the levers of power within the party. That purpose is better served by a losing Ford, Dole, McCain, Romney, or the like, than a winning conservative.
#65. To: redleghunter (#64)
Sometimes a bright light has to shine to scatter the cockroaches. Cruz gave us some of that light yesterday. More to follow to see if he throws back the entire curtain to let the light in.
#66. To: redleghunter (#63)
hopefully roll back a lot of 'satanism.'
#67. To: Liberator (#59)
Dems are also corrupt crony capitalist incompetents. BUT WORSE.
#68. To: redleghunter (#63)
#69. To: Liberator (#62)
Standing on the principles of quicksand, and casting your vote on which way the wind happens to be blowing.
#70. To: Vicomte13 (#67)
The Republicans gave us Roe v. Wade and Casey, O'Connor, Kennedy and Souter. And Kelo.
#71. To: Jameson (#69)
(Edited)
Actually I really don't care much for political parties or labels like "conservative" or "liberal"
#72. To: Vicomte13 (#67)
Republicans lose wars.
#73. To: redleghunter (#64)
Cruz gave us some of that light yesterday.
ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith To Black Americans: Republicans Aren’t The Enemy
“Then we end up finding ourselves devoid of any representation whatsoever because nobody is competing to garner our vote and our support … let’s not be so transparent in our support for one party over another when that does not appear to be working for us. Force [politicians] to flatter us…”
#74. To: Liberator (#71)
I guess you don't much care for defining a person or party by their respective words, deeds, actions, life philosophy, or agendas either.
#75. To: Liberator (#70)
but you're making the mistake of confusing the RNC statist stranglehold on the GOP with the rest of the party.
#76. To: nolu chan (#73)
#77. To: Liberator (#71)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]