Patterico's Pontifications

3/15/2016

The Dishonest Trumpeter Narrative: “We Switched from Cruz to Trump After Chicago!” Is a Lie

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:51 am



The most important thing for Ted Cruz supporters to do today is not despair at the results. It gets better after today. When Trump people wage psychological warfare, we must remember that it’s phony and dishonest like the man himself — as I will prove in this post.

Let’s go straight to their phony psychological warfare. Trump people have been pushing a narrative that says: “I was for Cruz until he failed to support Trump’s free speech in Chicago on March 11. Now I’m all in for Trump.” This narrative is a lie from top to bottom.

First, let’s look at some of the messages to that effect on Twitter:

Nothing weird about that!

The link in these posts goes back to a comment at the conspiracy-theorist and pro-Trump (and anti-Cruz) site Conservative Treehouse. Yet, you’ll be shocked to learn, these people supported Trump long before March 11. I got into an amusing quarrel with one of them, and the tweets are instructive. Here they are making the declaration that they were having trouble deciding between Cruz and Trump right up to March 11, when the Trump Chicago rally was canceled:

3/11 changed it for you? ORLY?!

So, there’s that. There’s also the fact that Cruz laid the blame squarely on the protesters as well as on Trump’s violent rhetoric.

We need to learn to have disagreements without being disagreeable. To have disagreements while respecting human beings on the other side. Earlier today over thirty people were arrested at one rally. And then tonight, as violence broke out, the rally was canceled all together. Now, the responsibility for that lies with protesters who took violence into their own hands. But in any campaign responsibility starts at the top. Any candidate who is responsible for the culture of the campaign. And when you have a campaign that disrespects the voters, when you have a campaign that affirmatively encourages violence, when you have a campaign that is facing allegations of physical violence against members of the press, you create an environment that only encourages this sort of nasty discourse.

Trumpeters took that statement and went around saying that Cruz supports the protesters.

Because Trumpeters are dishonest. Like their candidate.

The dishonesty and fanaticism of Trumpeters is also important to keep in mind when you consider the poll that had 22% of people saying Chicago made them more likely to vote for Trump, with only 11% saying it would make them less likely to vote for him. I saw otherwise smart people claiming this represented an 11 point gain for Trump. Bull! It’s already-committed Trumpeters who form the 22%. That should be obvious to anyone observing how that core group acts.

So, back to today. The ideal scenario is: Rubio is crushed in Florida. Hopefully he gets out, and if not is a nonentity going into Utah, where Cruz will do great. This means the conservative, limited government vote will not be split going forward. Cruz gets it.

I’m okay with whatever happens in Ohio. If Kasich wins, he splits the Democrat vote going forward. If he loses, hopefully he’s out.

Missouri and Illinois, I worry, will be disappointments. If Cruz pulls out a win in one or both, I’ll be thrilled. But they’re open primaries, and Trump does well in those on account of him being a Democrat.

The thing is, going forward after today, more and more of the primaries will be closed. Cruz kills it in those primaries. With Rubio marginalized, he’ll start to pick up momentum and could easily re-set the race — unless everyone despairs and concedes the whole race after today.

Don’t fall for the dishonest Trumpeter narrative. Hold your head high and look forward to March 22.

194 Responses to “The Dishonest Trumpeter Narrative: “We Switched from Cruz to Trump After Chicago!” Is a Lie”

  1. “MILITARY TIMES SURVEY: Troops back Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders for president.”

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/229170/

    Colonel Haiku (eff58e) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:04 am

  2. You deserve a real nice cup of coffee, pastry of choice, and a morning off to make up for the punishment you took on doing the work for this post.

    I’ll leave it at that.

    MD not exactly in Philly (b0439a) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:05 am

  3. i’m at peace with whatever the voters decide

    kumbaya my friends

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:06 am

  4. As was often said previously,
    Obama wasn’t so much the problem as was the public that elected him,
    It’s the same public, and the same thing with Trump.

    MD not exactly in Philly (b0439a) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:07 am

  5. Sean Trende in support of Pat’s thesis that it ain’t over ’til it’s over. Not all Trumpistas are liars but Trumpismo has nothing to do with majority consensus and everything to do with manipulation of the emotions of a minority very susceptible to illusion. Their Liar in Chief knows how to play them like a fiddle – any Trump U sucker can offer confirmation.

    Rick Ballard (ba78e0) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:09 am

  6. For those who think Cruz is not up to the task,
    He may not be, but he will not violate the rule of law like Trump will.

    Apart from the grace of God,
    No one is up to the task,
    Not Humpty Dumpty and all of his men,
    Nor Cincinnatus, Augustus, Churchill, Reagan, Thatcher and Washington all rolled into one.

    MD not exactly in Philly (b0439a) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:12 am

  7. Thanks for the link, very rational.

    MD not exactly in Philly (b0439a) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:17 am

  8. Geez so it was Trumps fault that there was violent left wing protests eh? Just like it was Reagans fault that there was Violent protests during his term as governor?

    Pierre (041bd0) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:20 am

  9. Ted’s a lil frantic cause of he doesn’t have as many delegates as Mr. The Donald.

    Stay calm, Ted. When you compare, you despair! Be happy with the delegates god gives you as part of your dominion over the little furry animals plus also the fishes and the turtles.

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:35 am

  10. We need to learn to have disagreements without being disagreeable. To have disagreements while respecting human beings on the other side.

    Oh, is that what’s been going on here for months? Cruz supporters disagreeing with Trump supporters without being disagreeable? Cruz supporters respecting the opinions of others?

    Hell, Hoagie (a Cruz Supporter) can’t even suggest the most egregious violators tone it down without himself becoming the target of abuse. There’s a mob mentality loose here, a take no prisoners approach to total war. It starts at the top with Patterico, and infects many of his most loyal commenters, although to his great credit he doesn’t ban opposing voices, which is more civilized than many Cruz supporters, and former friends, would have it.

    Today is the day push comes to shove, Trump might win in Florida and Ohio which will pretty much seal the deal. Let’s see if we can be big enough to accept the people’s choice and begin the process of unifying against the Democrat candidate.

    ropelight (a633bc) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:41 am

  11. “begin the process of unifying against the Democrat candidate”

    No.

    Rick Ballard (ba78e0) — 3/15/2016 @ 8:47 am

  12. I think Trump will win both Florida and Ohio, but then I was certain Mitt Romney was going to beat Obama. And, I’m still not convinced Obama’s victory was on the up and up.

    ropelight (a633bc) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:00 am

  13. Tell me again why anyone uses Twitter? At its best it’s a proclamation that the sender is a member of a mob. And occasionally the sender can be identified as the leader of a mob. And how big is that mob in truth? The information content is negligible by design, meaning it’s all about asserting something without the need to back it up. Just consider the difficulty Patterico had in nailing down the inconsistencies in today’s Tweet. This “argument” looks more like a jigsaw puzzle than an essay. That said, it’s a PR guy’s dream. But for all its sound and fury, it signifies nothing.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:02 am

  14. Yeah, those comments by Cruz put me squarely in the Trump camp. I was aghast. That and those damn concern-eyebrows of his. I can’t take another Republican president who makes his eyebrows move around all over his face to show how concerned he is.

    Jcurtis (331c71) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:15 am

  15. We need to learn to have disagreements without being disagreeable. To have disagreements while respecting human beings on the other side.

    From Cruz’s lips to his supporter’s ears. I have never seen Republicans get so vulgar, so nasty and so disrespectful to one another in my life. That’s usually saved for the democrats, it’s their nature, they’re full of hate and envy. But Republicans are usually level headed especially with each other. Not this time. I don’t think Sen. Cruz wants his supporters in the mud.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:21 am

  16. Ropelight, actually Cruz has already walked away from Florida and Ohio. There was a rumored proposed deal (that Kasich and Rubio backed out on) in which Cruz would walk away from those two states if those two would drop out of the race afterwards, they could claim a victory in those two states (their home states) and go out with their heads held high. But it looks like neither one is going to pull out their own home states, so they will end up going home politically damaged goods. sux to be them. from here on out it is mostly closed primaries, many with winner take all rules, so from here on out things get more difficult for trump.

    Rorschach (8ddea0) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:22 am

  17. As an amateur trumpet player, I protest the use of the term “Trumpeter” to refer to Trump supporters. It besmirches the reputation of everyone who plays, or enjoys hearing, my instrument.

    As an old fogey who hates Twitter, I protest the display of these huge “tweet” thingies in this post — the medium which truncates all communications after 140 characters perversely takes up huge amounts of space when displayed here. The substance of the tweets could all be displayed in about two inches.

    BRB, have to go yell at the kids on my lawn.

    Okay, back:

    Otherwise, I commend Patterico on this post, which is well done indeed.

    I also second his encouragement to Cruz supporters not to be disappointed, regardless of tonight’s results. But I’m actually cautiously optimistic. All the focus has been on FL & OH, and yes, they’re important and they have a lot of winner-take-all delegates. But they’re not nearly as important, nor as likely to be decisive of anything, as Trump and the mainstream media are jointly pretending. There are delegates from other states up for grabs, and I think Cruz may surprise in a couple of them. And most importantly, the significance for today — regardless of the results in OH & FL — will be that both Kasich and Rubio won’t have any more states where they’re likely to be effective competitors at all. It’s been clear to anyone with any sense (which excludes both Rubio & Kasich) that this has been a two-man race for many weeks now. After today, that’s going to be indisputable.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:27 am

  18. Geez so it was Trumps fault that there was violent left wing protests eh?

    Was the Battle of Cable Street Moseley’s fault? Why yes, as a matter of fact, to a great extent it was.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:28 am

  19. I blame George Herbert Walker Bush for all of this. If he hadn’t broke the vow crossing his lips about no new taxes, we would not live in this political hell-scape.

    Our liberty will take few more agonal breaths, then it will be gone. There’s no place to go. We blew it.

    SarahW (67599f) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:30 am

  20. i hate that

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:31 am

  21. I’ll bet Cruz really regrets losing the incredibly important IntertwinedEz38 endorsement.

    JVW (9e3c77) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:31 am

  22. I’m more inclined toward “Trumpist” because of its resonance with Chekist and Chekism.

    I noticed that when protesters disrupted a Ted Cruz rally today, he referred to them as “Bernistas,” which fits nicely with the long-used term “Clintonistas.”

    These are all statist philosophies.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:33 am

  23. Beldar, in case you don’t feel like plowing through the mega-thread, I’d like to draw this comment to your attention.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:33 am

  24. This is just another sign of the “cult of personality” that many Trump supporters are under. They must use any method necessary to support their idol, and ignore the signs that he will lie to them just as he has anyone else. This video is describes in simple terms, what the immigration issue is, and the candidates various stands. https://youtu.be/moToQ5lLuAQ

    Bob (d91698) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:38 am

  25. Some moron Trumpist (#11) takes others here to task for being incivil to Trumpists. I’d respond, except that per his previous suggestion to me, I’m trying to “lay off the sauce,” to “get out more,” and to “get a chick.”

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:38 am

  26. Just remember, the margin between Trump and Cruz at this moment (prior to today’s contests) is only 90 delegates. That is essentially two states worth of delegates, and there are over 1400 delegates still to be divided up. It is by no means over after today (well except for Rubio and Kasich…)

    Rorschach (8ddea0) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:40 am

  27. Beldar, do you know Mike Palmquist? He is a buddy of mine and also an amateur Bugler. He often plays Taps at the VA Cemetary.

    Rorschach (6fc5f7) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:44 am

  28. Beldar – after their idol has called people a p@ssy, and other juvenile name-calling, it is the pinnacle of irony for a Trumpkin to throw a hissy fit and demand to be treated in a civil manner.

    JD (34f761) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:47 am

  29. I just got back from voting, on the Northwest Side of Chicago, a genuinely middle-class neighborhood.
    No lines except as caused by people having to fill out a ballot application, instead of simply signing the pre-printed ballot receipt as I remember from other elections. A “glitch” in the ballot-counting machine which spits the ballot back out so the precinct worker can take a really good look as to how you’ve voted. In other words, a normal contested primary in the City of Chicago.

    nk (dbc370) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:51 am

  30. Beldar, may I suggest “Trumpeteers”? As in “Who’s the leader of the club made for you and me ….”

    nk (dbc370) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:56 am

  31. “I’m okay with whatever happens in Ohio. If Kasich wins, he splits the Democrat vote going forward. If he loses, hopefully he’s out.”

    I saw what you did there…

    SPQR (a3a747) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:59 am

  32. Obama wasn’t so much the problem as was the public that elected him,
    It’s the same public, and the same thing with Trump.

    I’m guessing a major difference, however, is that the main portion of the electorate that felt giddy towards the current White House occupant was of the left and found all the very disreputable aspects of him to be innocuous at worst, perhaps even hip and cool at best. But the Peggy Noonans of America do fit your profile. Although I’m not sure how many of those type of Republicans or independents may be grimacing at Trump in 2016 more than they were admiring the crease of the pants of the Democrat Party’s candidate in November 2008.

    Mark (6c93d5) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:59 am

  33. @ Rorschach: I regularly played “Taps” at military and veterans’ funerals throughout junior high and high school, always in my Boy Scout uniform. It was incredibly meaningful. One of these days, when/if I ever retire, I’ll probably volunteer again (although alas, my Boy Scout uniform no longer fits). I was very pleased that the USNR furnished an honor guard at my dad’s funeral in 2009, but the “bugler” had one of those electronic jobbies, and if I’d have known they were going to do that, I’d have played there myself. As it was, though, my nephew — who’s a lieutenant commander in the USNR, currently assigned to active duty in Okinawa — did the flag presentation in his Navy dress whites, and that more than made up for my slight disappointment with the bugler.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:01 am

  34. I don’t believe Trumpist captures the idolatry aspect as well as does Trumpista. The Chekist connotation fits but Trump is shooting for idolatry at the Chavez level and Trumpista/Trumpismo is, IMO, a better analog. I suppose the offset is Chavez actually realized majority support while Trump never will.

    Rick Ballard (ba78e0) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:01 am

  35. A novel idea would be to treat everyone in a civil manner, and not bother with juveline name-calling at all. Crazy, right?

    Beldar, you have a really nice tone on the trumpet. I was recently in the OC with my sax, I wish I would have looked you up. Do you have a regular gig at all?

    Here’s a snapshot of the Chicago election:

    – Mrs. carlito is voting D in order to vote for Alderman (Dowell), state rep (Dunkin), and judges that aren’t awful as rated by the 11 rating bodies in IL.
    – I will be voting for Kasich and Mark Kirk for Senate, and not much else.

    carlitos (c24ed5) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:05 am

  36. You could have just as easily highlighted the two following sentences:

    But in any campaign responsibility starts at the top. Any candidate who is responsible for the culture of the campaign. And when you have a campaign that disrespects the voters, when you have a campaign that affirmatively encourages violence, when you have a campaign that is facing allegations of physical violence against members of the press, you create an environment that only encourages this sort of nasty discourse.

    This is Ted Cruz or some dipshit hippie?

    CrustyB (69f730) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:07 am

  37. I voted for Vladimir Putin. I heard he was a strong leader.

    nk (dbc370) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:24 am

  38. Keep the faith for now for Cruz

    Marc (5691b6) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:31 am

  39. actually quite closer to silvio, that nothing berger in politico, re lewandowski, then again they puffed up dr. evil who 2/5 and I was being generous, there may be a wallace or a schmidt or a salter somewhere in those ranks,

    narciso (732bc0) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:31 am

  40. it’s gonna take a lotta Trump to change the way things are

    it’s gonna take a lotta Trump or we won’t get too far

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:36 am

  41. The thing is, going forward after today, more and more of the primaries will be closed. Cruz kills it in those primaries.

    I wonder where this little “fact” comes from? It’s been repeated on this blog over and over by a variety of posters, including Patterico. Certainly not reality. To date there have been only three closed primaries. Cruz has won 2, Trump 1.

    Trump: LA
    Cruz: OK, ID

    Perhaps you meant closed primaries AND caucuses?
    Trump: NV, KY, LA, HI,
    Cruz: IA, AK, OK, KS, ME
    Rubio: DC

    There is only one closed primary today, and sadly for your thesis, Cruz is running a distant third to front-runner Trump, who will likely claim all 99 delegates in FL. That would make Trump exactly even with Cruz in closed primaries and closed contests, only he will be leading by over 200 delegates. Even if Cruz could somehow split the remaining primaries, the chances of him having more delegates at the convention is less than me winning the Powerball.

    And if open primaries are the bane of true conservatives and Republicans, and should be discounted as “not legitimate” somehow, what are we supposed to do with Cruz’s singular signature victory in TX? Were all all the voters there Democrats, too? Or are the rules different if Cruz wins?

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:36 am

  42. Forgot the link, for those playing along at home:
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/republican_delegate_count.html

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:38 am

  43. Teh “ista” is reserved for Sanders and his Sanderistas, thank you berry much.

    Colonel Haiku (eff58e) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:40 am

  44. he’s trump, he’s trump
    he’s in my head
    he’s trump, he’s trump, he’s trump
    Cruz might be dead

    Colonel Haiku (eff58e) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:44 am

  45. volodya is oprichniki, a much older order, back to ivan the terrible,

    http://www.france24.com/en/20160315-shots-fired-brussels-police-raid-linked-paris-attacks

    trump is merely jacksonian, with a touch of tr,

    narciso (732bc0) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:46 am

  46. Nice reference, Col. Haiku 🙂

    carlitos (c24ed5) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:48 am

  47. There’s a mob mentality loose here, a take no prisoners approach to total war. It starts at the top with Patterico, and infects many of his most loyal commenters, although to his great credit he doesn’t ban opposing voices, which is more civilized than many Cruz supporters, and former friends, would have it.

    What ropelight said here. However reading these denial posts is scary. How can you call a person’s expression of their opinion or expression of a change of heart “a lie”? That’s unhinged. People have every reason to change their minds going toward Trump or moving away from him. To say that you know when someone is lying about what they themselves think is cuckoo. Not to mention saying this about a large group of people whom you’ve never met nor know anything about. Of course some are lying but how you propose to know or to say how many are doing so smells of desperation and again, only drives people further away from your position.

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:49 am

  48. really maverick, do tell where were you when it mattered,

    http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-01/administration-breaks-silence-on-sailors-detained-by-iran

    narciso (732bc0) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:51 am

  49. All the twits are identical, WTP. Word for word the same. It’s a disinformation campaign at a level of obviousness that would fool only a Trumpeteer.

    nk (dbc370) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:53 am

  50. prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:36 am

    It’s clearly the case that Cruz does better in closed states so far than he does in open ones. Five of his 7 wins are in closed states (and one of his 2 non-closed was of course Texas). OTOH, only 4 of Trump’s 15 wins are in closed states. So when you look at it that way, which I believe is a more accurate way of looking at it, closed states are much better for Cruz. If those percentages continue things look pretty good for Cruz.

    Strange that you think Cruz winning his home state of TX is problematic for the idea that Cruz does much better in closed states.

    Gerald A (945582) — 3/15/2016 @ 10:55 am

  51. Narciso,

    Trump would have to own a major network in order to point to Berlusconi as an analog. Mediaset was the largest commercial network in Italy when Berlusconi entered politics and it still is today. Trump’s stint as a reality show host gave him the widest name recognition in the field but his inability to improve his negatives illustrate the traits for which he is recognized.

    Rick Ballard (ba78e0) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:00 am

  52. I could end up being a Trumpaholic.
    Cruz/West

    mg (31009b) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:05 am

  53. All the twits are identical, WTP. Word for word the same. It’s a disinformation campaign at a level of obviousness that would fool only a Trumpeteer.

    Don’t comment here often enough to know you nk, but you are kidding, right? What “disinformation” are you accusing me of spreading? That people who are on the fence can and do change their minds? That judging whether large groups of people whom you don’t know are lying about their own feelings and opinions is possible within an order of magnitude? Paranoia strikes deep…

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:06 am

  54. this is the reality, that we are facing,

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/14/toronto-military-recruitment-center-stabbings-atta/

    my reservations about trump, have been made clear, however, resorting to the same Frankfurt school terminology, that was already shopworn by goldwater’s time is a mugs game,

    narciso (732bc0) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:06 am

  55. Or did I mis-read that?

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:11 am

  56. WTP – did you bother to read any of the examples in the post, the ones that nk is referring to?

    JD (34f761) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:12 am

  57. The twits are the disinformation campaign.

    nk (dbc370) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:13 am

  58. how widespread are these telltale tweets, it’s not mediamatters, and krystal ball, trying to take down rush, they don’t go anywhere,

    narciso (732bc0) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:17 am

  59. I read this:
    Let’s go straight to their phony psychological warfare. Trump people have been pushing a narrative that says: “I was for Cruz until he failed to support Trump’s free speech in Chicago on March 11. Now I’m all in for Trump.” This narrative is a lie from top to bottom.

    Which is weak and smells of desperation. For the very reasons I stated. I confess I did not read all those tweets, a couple of which, yes, could be suspect. But the blanket statement and the paranoia about disinformation campaigns and such. It almost smells to me like Patterico, you, etc. are really working for Trump trying to make Cruz folks look crazy. The thing with the woman reporter and the arm grab? Soros’s basement boys could have done a better hit job. I think a bottle of xanax would be in order here.

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:17 am

  60. Gerald A @ 52

    The claim is not that Cruz does better in closed than open. The claim is “he kills it” and the closed primaries ahead ensure he will take down Trump. Clearly, that is not the case. Facts are pesky that way. The best an honest person could say is that Cruz has a chance to pick up more delegates in the second half of the primaries than the first.

    And the claim made here is that open primaries (or caucuses) are “true” indicators of support among “real” Republicans. Thus, the fact that Trump has won 11 is an indicator of his illegitimate support. So I asked if open events are tainted, why isn’t TX, which is Cruz’s only significant victory in terms of delegates. I even stated it in my post, so the fact you have tried to claim that I used it to claim anything about Cruz shows your intellectual dishonesty.

    What should be more important is which are winner take all and who is winning those states:

    Trump: FL, IL, MI, AZ, WI, MD, PA, CA, NJ
    Rubio: MT
    ?: DE, IN, NE, SD
    Kasich: OH

    Cruz: NADA

    So explain to me how things look “pretty good for Cruz” again. He is not competitive in winner-take-all states (which he needs to have a prayer of catching Trump) and he only holds serve in closed primaries. So he may well win some more primaries, but translating those into delegates, not so much. Pesky math, pesky facts.

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:18 am

  61. “Focused Targeting” will be a big test for the Cruz campaign tonight. Uncharted territory. Perhaps a win in Mo.

    mg (31009b) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:18 am

  62. Happily filled in the Cruz bubble on my ballot here in NC.

    Memories (c0371d) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:20 am

  63. I liked JD’s “Trumpkins,” personally. Nicely evokes the fawning, bumbling incompetence that seems to characterize the sect. Think Munchkins in red trucker caps.

    We represent the build a wall guild
    the build a wall guild, the build a wall guild

    And in the name of
    the build a wall guuuiiiilllld
    we wish to welcome you to Trumpkin land

    Leviticus (efada1) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:30 am

  64. Dear Liberals, remember that time (well all the time) I called you childish imbeciles. I am sorry because we have gone full blown idiot also.

    Rodney King's Spirit (a089dc) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:35 am

  65. trumplestiltskins!

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:39 am

  66. WTP – they are not “suspect”. They are identical.

    Prowler guy – how do you think your idol will do when Rubio and Kasich are out of the race? Where is your idols path to getting the requisite number of delegates prior to the convention?

    JD (34f761) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:40 am

  67. It is always funny when someone like WTP comes along and rails and wails about a post and doesn’t bother to read it.

    JD (34f761) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:41 am

  68. I’ll start believing in this widespread groundswell of support for Trump when he starts getting an actual majority, somewhere.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:42 am

  69. I believe a better term than trumpeter is strumpet.

    jb (24fe5c) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:43 am

  70. Oooh, strumpet’s a good one too. Nicely conveys the shameless whoreishness.

    Leviticus (efada1) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:44 am

  71. #50: narciso, so there’s no real information on the hostage taking yet. And they say that about two months hence, after the official results are presented to the WH and State Department, and after they have determined which parts of the report conform to U. S. policy, then we will be given a [redacted] report. I’m not optimistic. But John McCain is happy because he got his special top secret briefing. We can trust John to know what’s important because … err … well because!

    Did you notice that Admiral Richardson was either misquoted, or he is a supporter of Iran’s intentions in the region, or he has a habit of using words whose meanings he doesn’t understand? How else can you interpret “Richardson said Tuesday that Iran’s “maligned intent” remains across several areas.” I used to think we opposed Iran’s plans to nuke Israel, but perhaps I have been misinformed.

    It is possible that Richardson was misquoted. I don’t trust anyone under forty to have a working knowledge of English, particularly if they were Journalism majors in college.

    Oh well.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:47 am

  72. @ carlitos (#38): Thanks! But I only pick up the horn about a half dozen times a year, mostly for Longhorn Alumni Band performances (we do a halftime show along with the current Longhorn Band at one home game every fall, plus assorted small gigs at alumni fundraisers). Maybe you, I & Patterico can jam some day. 😀

    @ prowlerguy: No one is claiming that delegates from open primaries and caucuses are “illegitimate.” Unwad your undies. And yes, Texas has a (modified) open primary, but more people turned out to vote for Ted Cruz alone than voted in the previous record-setting GOP primary in 2012. But some Dems did indeed cast strategic spoiling votes, and they probably prevented Cruz from getting the 50% which would have given him all of Texas’ delegates. What Trump should be worried about is that the actual delegates being selected for the national convention are very unlikely to have any personal loyalty to Trump even in a great many states in which they’re committed, as a matter of state law, to vote for him on at least the first ballot. Most of those individuals are going to be longtime GOP members who have zero personal loyalty to the Donald and who will therefore be ready, willing, and eager to vote for someone else, like Ted Cruz, if Trump doesn’t have a first-ballot majority. That won’t be a matter of anyone changing any existing rules; rather, it will just reflect Trump’s poor campaign organization and lack of political savvy. I guarantee you that the Cruz campaign is following up on delegate selection issues in these states; your guy is going to be badly outmaneuvered, but not cheated out of anything.

    @ Leviticus (#65): “Trumpkins” is pretty good. It would get under Trump’s skin — you know, the skin on his small, Munchkin-sized hands.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:49 am

  73. I believe a better term than trumpeter is strumpet.

    But a strumpet at least makes a profit out of the deal. Trumpies just get conned for nothing.

    Luke Stywalker (78d90b) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:50 am

  74. well richardson is an engineer by education, and a boomer captain by experience, then again this may be the kind of dang fool the selection boards promote,

    narciso (732bc0) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:01 pm

  75. I, too, have officially withdrawn my endorsement and support for Ted Cruz.

    Now I’m supporting Pat Frey.

    However, when election day comes, I many have to rethink my vote if I believe the Supreme Court hangs in the balance.

    And how about Beldar for VP? He has a sort of commanding impatience that makes for a good VP – like Dick Cheney.

    Anyway, nice post. And you’re right: hope springs eternal. I only wish this hadn’t been such a springy few weeks.

    ThOR (a52560) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:01 pm

  76. @ Milhouse (#26): Normally, I’d agree with you that it’s “[b]etter to just admit that you were wrong to have made the pledge, and do the right thing,” if you later decide that the pledge was foolish when made, or even that it’s become foolish based on later events.

    Here, though, I don’t: The whole point of the candidates making the pledge was so that voters could rely upon that in deciding among them. The pledge isn’t legally binding, whether “at law or in equity,” but I think the equitable principle of estoppel nevertheless applies here in a moral and political context. Having invited voters to rely upon the pledge, I don’t think it can now be disavowed without dishonor. But I stress, again, that the level of dishonor is trivial compared to the kinds of dishonorable lies that Donald Trump tells during every single waking hour of his life.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:02 pm

  77. prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:18 am

    Who said open events are “tainted”?

    I said Cruz does much better in closed states. TX being an exception to that rule does not disprove that theory for obvious reasons. This is not complicated.

    Gerald A (945582) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:03 pm

  78. How else can you interpret “Richardson said Tuesday that Iran’s “maligned intent” remains across several areas.” I used to think we opposed Iran’s plans to nuke Israel, but perhaps I have been misinformed.

    I assume it’s a mistranscription, and he actually said “malign”.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:13 pm

  79. take it up with priebus, who left the primaries open, and let the dnc pick the moderators, it’s a strange feeling of deja vu,

    narciso (732bc0) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:13 pm

  80. What should be more important is which are winner take all and who is winning those states:

    Trump: FL, IL, MI, AZ, WI, MD, PA, CA, NJ

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 11:18 am

    I did a quick check of winner take all CA at RCP. The latest poll is from 1/3 (not real recent) but Cruz was ahead of Trump by 2. And CA is a closed state. My guess is Cruz has improved since then. In any case, the pattern is once again that Cruz does better in closed states compared to open states.

    Gerald A (945582) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:18 pm

  81. What Trump should be worried about is that the actual delegates being selected for the national convention are very unlikely to have any personal loyalty to Trump […] Most of those individuals are going to be longtime GOP members who have zero personal loyalty to the Donald

    How are delegates selected? Doesn’t each candidate put up a list of his loyalists as candidates for delegateship, and the top however many names from that list get chosen? Surely each candidate’s list would be stacked with his strongest loyalists.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:20 pm

  82. For years, the GOPe has been telling us that we should nominate a squish because he’d need crossover votes from moderate Democrats to win the White House. Now we have a squish and the same GOPe is telling us that he’s un-electable.

    There are many reasons to disfavor Trump as the Republican nominee, but I don’t believe un-electability is one of them. In open primary states, Dems who are rightly disgusted with the Hill or Bern choice are crossing over, en masse, to vote for Trump. Why wouldn’t that pattern repeat itself next fall?

    One more thought. Would Reagan have been elected without his celebrity status? Wasn’t that the one thing that distinguished him from Goldwater? It was just a happy accident that Reagan was also a principled conservative. Voters love celebrities, principled conservatives not so much.

    ThOR (a52560) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:21 pm

  83. OK, I apologize for not reading ALL of it. I was wrong not to do so. Being generally rather busy I got as far as the blanket statement and realized that such was BS, glanced over the tweets and the Holstien stuff (wtf that is) and rolled my eyes. I do stand by my reaction to the original statement that is just ridiculous, that being:

    Trump people have been pushing a narrative that says: “I was for Cruz until he failed to support Trump’s free speech in Chicago on March 11. Now I’m all in for Trump.” This narrative is a lie from top to bottom.

    Note, not qualified…unless you consider “from to to bottom” qualified.

    Whatever the source of these tweets, their existence does not discredit the many post by many former and even current Cruz supporters here, on Ace (many, many I’ve read there), elsewhere in the conservative sphere stating similar sentiment. You anti-Trumpers have lost your minds.

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:23 pm

  84. Having invited voters to rely upon the pledge, I don’t think it can now be disavowed without dishonor.

    But it can’t be kept without dishonor either. Or, if you like, putting ones personal honor above the nation’s interest is selfish and dishonorable. When the USA’s founders pledged “our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor”, didn’t that mean they were ready to give up all three, if necessary?

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:26 pm

  85. I’ve changed my mind about Cruz, he is knuckling under. It does not help that his staunchest
    supporters are drooling imbeciles.
    DNF (755a85) — 3/13/2016 @ 7:20 am

    You people are inarticulate, uniformed and incapable of self-awareness, in a word ‘Cattle’.
    DNF (755a85) — 3/14/2016 @ 3:44 am

    It’s not Cruz I’m worried about, its the rest of you cocks^ckers.
    DNF (ffe548) — 3/6/2016 @ 1:37 pm

    …..
    We just proceed on our merry way, phuckwits.
    …..
    DNF (755a85) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:28 am

    Luke Stywalker (78d90b) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:28 pm

  86. I’m sensing a pattern, Luke.

    Colonel Haiku (eff58e) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:32 pm

  87. For years, the GOPe has been telling us that we should nominate a squish because he’d need crossover votes from moderate Democrats to win the White House. Now we have a squish and the same GOPe is telling us that he’s un-electable.

    Trump is not a squish. He has no principles, but he’s not a squish either. A squish bends to pressure. Trump doesn’t; whatever he believes in at any given moment, he believes strongly and will champion against all pressure, until he changes his mind.

    One more thought. Would Reagan have been elected without his celebrity status? Wasn’t that the one thing that distinguished him from Goldwater?

    No, not at all. As an actor Reagan wasn’t a celebrity; he was distinctly B list. He was elected on the strength of the reputation he’d built up, first as a public conservative intellectual (via his TV show and then his speech at the 1964 convention), then as a governor, and finally as a failed (by a hair) candidate in 1976. What distinguished him from Goldwater was mainly that in the aftermath of Dallas Goldwater was running in an unwinnable election; Reagan would have done just as poorly, or worse.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:33 pm

  88. Whatever the source of these tweets, their existence does not discredit the many post by many former and even current Cruz supporters here, on Ace (many, many I’ve read there), elsewhere in the conservative sphere stating similar sentiment.

    Yes, it does. Given the existence of this coordinated campaign there is no reason to suppose any of those people were ever Cruz zupporters.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:35 pm

  89. See, I point out the FACT that the whole “Cruz kills it in closed primaries” meme is total bull excrement, and all of a sudden, it’s “my idol”. Exactly one side here has proclaimed that it’s their way or the highway, and if their guy doesn’t get it, they are taking their ball home, or even worse, going over to Bernie’s with their ball. I haven’t see a single Trump supporter here say they won’t vote for the R nominee in the general. And what makes nk so certain that all the voters will flock to Cruz. So far we’ve had quite a few candidates drop out, including Jeb. Why isn’t Cruz winning yet?

    Gerald A @78, you are not new here. I refuse to dredge the sewer that this blog has become to show you what you know is there. Are you claiming you have not seen ANYONE claiming that since open primaries allow ANYONE to vote (including Democrats and Independents) Trump’s victories are not indicative of actual support among “real” Republicans? Heck, even Beldar, while trying to make the case that TX is a special kind of open that doesn’t count, still slips and blames those “illegitimate” voters for costing Cruz 100% of the delegate.

    Beldar @73 So not only are you admitting that Cruz will not get the 1237 votes to win outright, but not even a plurality of the delegates. You are counting on Cruz getting just enough to deny Trump the outright victory, and stake your whole hopes for this primary season on overturning the will of the people through procedural BS. Kind of like how Obamacare was passed, without originating in the House as required by law, by replacing 100% of the language of HR3590 (a military housing bill). Sure, they made the rules up as they went along, and sure, the votes did not reflect the will of the people. But hey, by any means necessary, right? If Cruz couldn’t even get the most Republican votes, how will he ever stand a chance in a general election?

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:39 pm

  90. I missed the Cruz supporters here changing their minds over something he didn’t say.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:42 pm

  91. #79: milhouse, I hope you are correct and Admiral Richardson has been maligned by the devious press. It wouldn’t be the first time.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:43 pm

  92. I was, Milhouse. Documented by my own postings right here. But once the crazy got set loose here, I no longer wanted to be associated with a man that attracted that kind of support. Simple as that. The “faithful” here cost Cruz a vote. I doubt I am alone.

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:43 pm

  93. Prowler – if he doesn’t get the requisite number, he doesn’t win. Those are the rules. Don’t like it? Change it. The rest of yours was Obama-esque in the amount of strawpeople you doused in gas and torched with your flamethrower.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:46 pm

  94. Beldar @73 So not only are you admitting that Cruz will not get the 1237 votes to win outright, but not even a plurality of the delegates. You are counting on Cruz getting just enough to deny Trump the outright victory, and stake your whole hopes for this primary season on overturning the will of the people through procedural BS.

    If Trump doesn’t get a majority, then there will be no “will of the people” to nominate him. There is no legal, ethical, or moral reason why a plurality of delegates gives someone more right to the nomination than anyone else. Inventing such a rule now would be “procedural BS”.

    Kind of like how Obamacare was passed, without originating in the House as required by law, by replacing 100% of the language of HR3590 (a military housing bill).

    That is all the law requires.

    Sure, they made the rules up as they went along,

    They didn’t make up any rule as they went along; that is the rule. Amending a bill by replacing all of its words has been a standard procedure for well over a century, if not far longer.

    and sure, the votes did not reflect the will of the people. But hey, by any means necessary, right?

    In what way did they not reflect the will of the people? The people elected a heavily Democratic House and Senate. That’s all the “will of the people” that our constitution is designed to reflect. It is specifically not intended to reflect the latest polls on any given issue.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:49 pm

  95. Gerald A @81

    There are indeed very few polls on CA yet (like many states). And I will agree that the trend there is definitely in Cruz’s favor, and the running average methodology almost universally used is likely to not be as predictive as one might want. It is certainly possible that Cruz could win CA, but it is winner take all *by congressional district*, so that tempers things a little.

    http://www.270towin.com/2016-republican-nomination-polls/
    http://www.270towin.com/2016-republican-nomination/california-primary

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:49 pm

  96. Ted Cruz has been my overwhelming first choice long before official campaigning began. Compared to Trump, Rubio, and Kasich, nothing Cruz says or does will change that.

    Unfortunately, as to be expected, the MSM bannered headlines on Cruz’s comment so as to ignore nuance and it’s reasonable call for civility, and turn it into a one-sided attack on Trump. Hence, many of us (myself included) were disappointed in what we thought Cruz had said.

    Burned again. When Cruz’s reasonable comments are warped to make Cruz look cynical, it suited MSM political prejudices.

    Sadly, Trump and Cruz supporters seem to be unaware of their manipulation.

    Mark Hamilton (b50cc4) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:50 pm

  97. Still waiting for a Trump supporter to provide an intelligent, non-bigoted, policy-based articulation of his/her support for Trump.

    I’ll keep waiting, no doubt.

    Leviticus (efada1) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:52 pm

  98. #79: milhouse, I hope you are correct and Admiral Richardson has been maligned by the devious press. It wouldn’t be the first time.

    This wouldn’t be a case of being “maligned by the devious press”, but of falling victim to a stupid transcription error. “Malign” and “maligned” sound close enough to be confused by someone who is not paying attention to the meaning of what he is transcribing, and spell checkers won’t catch the error.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:52 pm

  99. JD, we all here used to (rightly) malign the Democrats for their use of superdelegates, whose only real function is to ensure the “right” candidate wins their primary. I still think those sorts of shenanigans suck. You, however, have seemed to develop a taste for parliamentary legerdemain and back room deals, since that is the only way your preferred candidate will get the nomination.

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:57 pm

  100. The idea that Cruz supporters would have second thoughts over Cruz’s remarks regarding Trump’s encouragement of violence is silly. We all saw the clips featuring Trump saying stuff that wasn’t really needed, nor helpful in the long run. We also know that the violence was perpetrated by thugs who entered the rally posing as spectators or supporters. We also know that this won’t stop, and is likely to increase. And now we know that the Chicago Police did very little to protect Trump’s fans at the rally, and many had their car’s window smashed in, which is a costly attack. This violence will be the story of the upcoming campaign, and it is important that the Republican’s position be unambiguously on the side of law and order.

    The important thing is that we position ourselves for the actions that must be taken if we are to enjoy the freedom of political expression in the upcoming election. We can be sure that the local police in many urban jurisdictions will be officially indifferent to vandalism and violence directed at us. Having Trump say things that allow the squishes to say all Republicans had this coming is not helpful.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:59 pm

  101. Trump is good cause of he wants to make America great again Mr. Leviticus

    He’ll be very motivated ergo for to do things that are good for America (not pooper things)

    He’s a very results-oriented person you know

    he’s a lot like Gandalf

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 3/15/2016 @ 12:59 pm

  102. Democrats taking republican ballots in ohio. When newsman ask democrat woman why she is taking republican ballot to vote against trump? She says no to vote for trump to bring our jobs back! Good news for trump bad news for hillary!

    trump 2 (1eb269) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:03 pm

  103. 70 JD

    Will you settle for a majority of the delegates?

    You sound a lot like the people who said Gore beat Bush because he won the popular vote but lost the EC.

    pinandpuller (c16705) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:04 pm

  104. F U Leviticus. I’m done falling for your ruse. You DON’T CARE. Even if Ted Cruz was found paying PP to abort his child from an underage illegal immigrant who then left to fight with ISIS, you would not care. Several have tried to express their concern over the effects of uncontrolled illegal immigration on our economy, government infrastructure and resources, and demographic future of the electorate, only to be told we are racists. That we hate Mexicans and are afraid. I’m not playing that game any more.

    I challenge you: Based on actual record of accomplishments, please articulate what makes Ted Cruz the man for the job? And you don’t get to reference any other candidate in your response.

    Ted Cruz has done absolutely nothing to curtail illegal immigration at all in his time in DC. In fact, he wanted all those here already to be able to stay, indefinitely, without even trying to become citizens. Results matter. Cruz has none. Move aside, and let the grownups take care of things. When we’ve got things in order, you can go back to pretending to be a conservative while doing all you can to empower RINOS and DEMS

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:07 pm

  105. #99, milhouse, I believe editors have some role to play in preventing such “transcription” errors from changing the meaning of a statement. So I’ll stick with a devious press as the most likely explanation, followed at a distance by an unintentional misuse of the term. Simple errors and omissions by the media have proven to be anything but over the last four decades.

    That’s how it looks through my rose colored glasses.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:09 pm

  106. Now you are just making shlt up, prowler. I have never expressed a desire for that. You were the one whining about following the rules, I simply pointed out that your guy will likely fail that initial rule. I won’t wait for you to retract your lie.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:12 pm

  107. @98. That’s because you approach Trump supporters with your mind wide shut, Levidicus. Seems as soon as someone says something you don’t like you start with the “bigot” crap. So of course to you any Trump supporter is a bigot, racist etc. Therefore, nothing a Trump supporter could say would be “intelligent” or “Non-bigoted” or “policy-based”. You paint with such a wide brush you need a roller.

    You are permitted to disagree with someone just “because”. You don’t have to try and justify it by calling them stupid racists.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:13 pm

  108. Pinandpuller follows suit. The rules going in are clear. It is you who seeks to change majority to plurality.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:14 pm

  109. Yes, it does. Given the existence of this coordinated campaign there is no reason to suppose any of those people were ever Cruz zupporters.

    Well, no, not exactly. There is reason to be suspect about THOSE specific people. However I will say it is entirely possible it was all generated. But to say a bunch of Trumpers on Twitter (Twumpers?) represent everyone with second thoughts on Cruz is grasping at semantics. If we’re going to play that game the string “I was for Cruz until he failed to support Trump’s free speech in Chicago on March 11. Now I’m all in for Trump.” does not match word-for-word “I have officially withdrawn my endorsement and support for Ted Cruz. His decision to blame…” But that would be a ridiculous and silly argument to make.

    Look, if you don’t think there are bots out there of all kinds pushing Rubio, Trump, Kasich, Cruz, Clinton, Burnie, etc. lines…well, there’s no way I believe you’re that politically naive. To latch on to this as “proof” of a Trump conspiracy and to dismiss the idea that many Cruz supporters were annoyed with his reaction to Chicago and that for a certain number of them, that was a bridge too far, again smells of desperation. Which does not sell the Cruz brand very well. Hell, I’d bet there are probably as many, if not more, Cruz supporters who are more turned off by the conspiracy madness of this than by the original misstep by Cruz to not be more clear in his support of free speech. Wild speculation on my part, but given the context, wth.

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:14 pm

  110. Amending a bill by replacing all of its words has been a standard procedure for well over a century, if not far longer.

    Show me one single spending bill where this was done. And if it was such a common and accepted practice, what would have made Democrats admit that they were changing the rules? To quote Democrat Rep. Alcee Hastings of the House Rules Committee during the bill process: “We’re making up the rules as we go along.”

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:14 pm

  111. . In fact, he wanted all those here already to be able to stay, indefinitely, without even trying to become citizens.

    False.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:15 pm

  112. I call BS, Hoagie and prowler. I have not heard anyone try to make the case beyond saying illegal immigration. At least the white nationalist last night tried to make a case.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:16 pm

  113. #99, milhouse, I believe editors have some role to play in preventing such “transcription” errors from changing the meaning of a statement.

    Editors?! That used to be the job of proofreaders, but no newspapers seem to have been employing those for at least 20 years. Editors don’t have time to actually read the articles, let alone to proofread them. Even the subeditors who write the headlines often don’t read the article first, resulting in headlines that contradict the content.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:17 pm

  114. To prowlerguy @ 105. Here is as you said: “I challenge you: Based on actual record of accomplishments”.

    •Introduced two bills to protect Americans from an influx of refugees who could be a national security risk, including legislation barring refugees from terrorist-ridden regions and legislation to recognize governors’ authority to protect the citizens in their states by rejecting to resettle refugees in their state.
    •When Cruz came to the Senate in 2013, he coalesced conservatives across the country to defeat the Gang of Eight bill that failed to secure the border and would have granted amnesty to millions who came to the United States illegally.
    •During the Gang of Eight fight, Cruz offered a series of amendments, including measures to prevent citizenship for those here illegally, to block illegals’ access to federal, state, or local public assistance benefits, secure the border, triple the size of the Border Patrol, and implement a biometric entry-exit system.
    •Introduced Kate’s Law to establish a 5-year minimum sentence for those who illegally reenter the country.
    •Introduced with Jeff Sessions the American Jobs First Act of 2015, to reform the H-1B program, curb abuse, and protect American workers.
    •Proposed a number of measures to defund President Obama’s amnesty and prevent him from expanding it

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:18 pm

  115. and by “entirely possible it was all generated” I meant that there might not be such actual people behind the tweets. However it could be the result of individual people visiting a page and clicking a “click here if you switched from Cruz”. Either way, not representative of those who grew to be dissatisfied with Cruz or those whose were leaning Cruz when their horse dropped out and decided to switch to Trump based on the Chicago stuff.

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:19 pm

  116. WTP – reading is fundamental. Not only were they identical, but a review of their Twitter timelines showed them to be anything but Cruz supporters previously. Nothing in his speech was unclear. You fell for the MFM version of the speech.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:20 pm

  117. That’s exactly what you are advocating, JD. You are advocating that a parliamentary move (not enough votes on first ballot) will free the delegates to ignore what the voters said, and instead pick someone else. And if you don’t think that the deals and pork won’t be flying if that becomes a reality, well, I don’t believe you are that naive. So you fully support the exact kind of stuff the Dems do. And I guarantee that if the shoe were on the other foot, and your boy wasn’t losing miserably, and Trump had the GOP machine behind him ready to buy all the votes he needed, you’d have a different opinion of the “rules”.

    But, this may all be moot. Trump can still get 1237, and then your fantasy goes up in smoke.

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:21 pm

  118. His speech was clear. Instead of castigating the heads of the campaigns where the violent thugs came from, he chose to blame Trump. If Cruz were not an also-ran, his campaign events and rallies would be getting violent now, too. In fact, he had some early probes recently to see how his security reacts. Count on more once their recon is complete.

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:23 pm

  119. I am advocating nothing of the sort. That is a lie and you are a liar. It isn’t a parliamentary trick. It is the rules as established long before the race started. I happen to think that Trump voters should stay with Trump beyond the first ballot. But you are too beholden to the idea of telling me what I believe than discussing things like an adult.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:23 pm

  120. “I challenge you: Based on actual record of accomplishments, please articulate what makes Ted Cruz the man for the job? And you don’t get to reference any other candidate in your response.”

    – prowler guy

    I don’t support Ted Cruz, dude. I find his policy preferences largely repulsive. But at least he (and his supporters) know what his policy preferences are, and can articulate them and defend them. Can’t say the same for Trump or his supporters. “Ey tuk er jerbs!!” is not an intelligent, non-bigoted platform.

    I don’t support any of the presidential candidates of either major party. I do not trust them, and I by and large do not like them. They do not represent my policy preferences, so I do not support them. How hard is that?

    Leviticus (efada1) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:24 pm

  121. Fanboi’s are special.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:25 pm

  122. 113.I call BS, Hoagie and prowler. I have not heard anyone try to make the case beyond saying illegal immigration.

    And since you haven’t heard it, it doesn’t exist eh, JD? All one has to do is take two minutes and go to the web site and you’ll see dozens of reasons. Besides, people are not required to have any reasons, not even beyond illegal immigration. And why is illegal immigration somehow not good enough?

    You do realize people voted for Obama because he is black.
    You do realize some people will vote for Hillary! because she’s a woman.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:25 pm

  123. trump wins! crud suppository time to take your suppository

    trump 2 (1eb269) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:25 pm

  124. “If Cruz were not an also-ran a vile, moronic bigot, his campaign events and rallies would be getting violent now, too.”

    – prowlerguy

    FTFY

    Leviticus (efada1) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:26 pm

  125. Hoagie – I want to hear someone make the case. Having a website means jack. Have a principle. Take a position and stick with it. Find me the first principles behind his platform of ideas. Lol. I could not care less if Dems voted in a silly way.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:28 pm

  126. Rev:
    But neither bill passed. Did they even come to the floor?
    And yes, Ted has been wonderful at saying “No”. But while he opposed citizenship for illegals, his solution was not to deport them, but to let them stay indefinitely. And despite your high praise for his work with Sessions, Sessions seems to feel differently about Ted’s commitment to curbing illegal immigration. So basically, he sings the right words, but nobody joins him and at the end of the day all you can hear is silence.

    But all that’s moot, because all those things make him a bigot who hates Mexicans, is afraid of Muslims, and is ineffective. And you are even worse because you support him. Shame on you. Go get ’em, Leviticus.

    prowlerguy (fa36d8) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:29 pm

  127. Amending a bill by replacing all of its words has been a standard procedure for well over a century, if not far longer.

    Show me one single spending bill where this was done.

    It has always been done, to all kinds of bills. And not just in this country but in all countries with parliamentary rules ultimately derived from those of Westminster. Anyone who knows anything about parliamentary procedure could tell you that.

    And if it was such a common and accepted practice, what would have made Democrats admit that they were changing the rules? To quote Democrat Rep. Alcee Hastings of the House Rules Committee during the bill process: “We’re making up the rules as we go along.”

    OMG you really have no idea what you’re talking about. Two things to note: First, that was a House member, so he can’t be talking about something that happened in the senate. Second, he was a member of the Rules Committee. What sort of rule would he have been referring to? Hint: what does the Rules Committee do?

    In actual fact Hastings wasn’t even referring to any specific rule; he was referring to general House practise — it always makes up its rules as it goes along, and does not adhere to any permanent rules. Nor is there any reason it has to; the constitution says that each house of congress determines its own rules, and if the House wants to do it that way, that’s its business.

    At any rate, he certainly was not referring to the constitutional requirement that a spending bill originate in the House.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:31 pm

  128. That’s exactly what you are advocating, JD. You are advocating that a parliamentary move (not enough votes on first ballot) will free the delegates to ignore what the voters said, and instead pick someone else.

    “Not enough votes on the first ballot” is not a parliamentary “move”, it’s a reality. The ballot is taken, and Trump doesn’t have a majority. Therefore he does not win. That is all. Once the first ballot is over the delegates have obeyed what their voters told tem: vote for Trump on the first ballot. That is all they ever pledged to do, and they’ve fulfilled their pledge. After that, the voters have not given them any further instructions, but on the contrary have trusted them to use their own judgment.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:35 pm

  129. 126.Hoagie – I want to hear someone make the case. Having a website means jack. Have a principle. Take a position and stick with it.

    JD, I just gave you a list of some of Cruz’s positions. His principles are those of a Constitutional conservative or have you not noticed that? His website may mean “jack” to you but you asked a question and I told you where to find the answer. If you still decide to live in blissful ignorance and not read it I can do no more.

    I’m not like the other guys here. You’re entitled not to like Cruz. You’re entitled to like Trump if you want. You can vote for Caitlyn Jenner for all care.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:38 pm

  130. Let’s assume we do end up with no candidate reaching the magic 1237. Let’s also assume that there are a top 2 (doesn’t matter who, or which one is ahead) and the rest are way back in numbers. I think the voters could accept one of the top 2 (either one) being the nominee, but there will be clear hell to pay (and a massive loss in November, including downticket) if the nomination ends up being stolen by parliamentary insider tricks and given to someone who finished a distant 3rd or 4th, or didn’t run at all.

    I find the above scenario worryingly plausible, given that the current top 2 (Cruz and Trump) are hated by an establishment that has vast influence in a brokered convention. Is that party establishment sufficiently arrogant and tin-eared enough to think they could get away with it? Their track record indicates that the answer is “yes”.

    I’m thus coming to view a brokered convention as a greater danger than any specific candidate.

    Arizona CJ (da673d) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:39 pm

  131. I know Cruz’s positions. I don’t know Trumps.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:40 pm

  132. Rev Hoagie,

    Caitlyn Jenner is a long time conservative.
    The greatest moment in the history of “The Kardashians” tv show was when the family was eating dinner, and a couple of the girls asked Bruce if he’s heard any of Lady Gaga’s songs on the radio. He replied, “I don’t even know who you’re talking about. When I listen to the radio, I listen to conservative talk radio—not pop music.”

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:44 pm

  133. Thank you for the correction milhouse. Proofreading is clearly quite an art. I’ll have to try it sometime. I wonder where they fit in the newsroom hierarchy. A sense of humor would probably be helpful, particularly at the NYT.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:47 pm

  134. Prowlerguy, you have never actually read the Congressional Record, have you?

    SPQR (a3a747) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:55 pm

  135. Nothing in his speech was unclear

    Oh BS. Here’s his statement….

    We need to learn to have disagreements without being disagreeable. To have disagreements while respecting human beings on the other side. Earlier today over thirty people were arrested at one rally. And then tonight, as violence broke out, the rally was canceled all together. Now, the responsibility for that lies with protesters who took violence into their own hands. But in any campaign responsibility starts at the top. Any candidate who is responsible for the culture of the campaign. And when you have a campaign that disrespects the voters, when you have a campaign that affirmatively encourages violence, when you have a campaign that is facing allegations of physical violence against members of the press, you create an environment that only encourages this sort of nasty discourse.

    He should have stopped before the bold. Would have then been clear. The time to criticize Trump for rhetoric was before this point. Granted, Cruz may have done so. But this statement without the bold part would have been an unequivocal support for free speech. Keep in mind most of Trump’s sharp rhetoric, and certainly the most serious of it, is in response to these out of control protests.

    Perhaps he could have first said “As I have said in the past regarding Donald…” but I suppose such is Monday morning quarterbacking. But either way, not as clear and forthright as required given the problems.

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:55 pm

  136. But all that’s moot, because all those things make him a bigot who hates Mexicans, is afraid of Muslims, and is ineffective. And you are even worse because you support him. Shame on you. Go get ’em, Leviticus.

    So you’re telling me Cruz, whose father was a Cuban immigrant, is a racist and hates Mexicans which are fellow Hispanics? And since he is not in favor of indiscriminately allowing moslems with potential terrorist ties to just enter our country he’s “afraid” of them? Why, that just sounds like common sense to me, boy! Are ya stupid or something? Why would you want to allow just anybody into our country? And why is it bigoted not to do so?

    And you’re damn right I support him and I have nothing to be ashamed of. I think Cruz represents the best way for us to get a handle on legal immigration and design a system that is both fair to the immigrants and beneficial to America. I also believe Cruz will build a system that deters illegal immigration with penalties for both the immigrant and people here who hire them. Our laws must be respected and our people must be safe. Allowing illegals of unknown origin and background to enter our country puts our citizens at risk. We see it all the time with crime and DU’s and such. And allowing uncontrolled and unknown moslems into the country will have the same results they have in France, Sweden and Germany and that ain’t good nor is it the American way.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:57 pm

  137. Let me guess…. All those that switch from Cruz to Trump VOTED FOR BARRACK OBAMA….

    HOW stupid they all look to be….

    jrt for Cruz (bc7456) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:00 pm

  138. WHEN HAS A REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE EVER GOTTEN SO MANY VOTES FROM DEMOCRATS before the nomination….NEVER. Reagan gained their vote only after be won the nomination FAIRLY as a republican.

    jrt for Cruz (bc7456) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:02 pm

  139. Let’s assume we do end up with no candidate reaching the magic 1237. Let’s also assume that there are a top 2 (doesn’t matter who, or which one is ahead) and the rest are way back in numbers. I think the voters could accept one of the top 2 (either one) being the nominee, but there will be clear hell to pay (and a massive loss in November, including downticket) if the nomination ends up being stolen by parliamentary insider tricks and given to someone who finished a distant 3rd or 4th, or didn’t run at all.

    Why? What are delegates elected for, if not to exercise their judgment? They pledge their vote on the first ballot; after that they’re supposed to do whatever they think best.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:03 pm

  140. God help us all because if Trump wins the nomination it will be the same uncertainty that we have seen from BO in the last 8 years

    jrt for Cruz (bc7456) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:04 pm

  141. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciC-UMstA-o

    BOOM

    jrt for Cruz (bc7456) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:06 pm

  142. Proofreading is clearly quite an art. I’ll have to try it sometime. I wonder where they fit in the newsroom hierarchy.

    Well, my experience as a reader leads me to conclude that for at least 20 years they have not fit into the newsroom at all. At least at the NYT. Back when I used to read the NYT I would regularly find editing marks left in the copy, which at least showed that someone was making them, but also stupid typos and mistranscriptions that any competent proofreader should have spotted. I think they’ve been relying on spell checkers and leaving it at that.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:07 pm

  143. God help us all because if Trump wins the nomination it will be the same uncertainty that we have seen from BO in the last 8 years

    Only this time as farce.

    Milhouse (87c499) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:08 pm

  144. WTP – sorry that is unclear to you. It is crystal clear to me.

    Prowler – I didn’t expect you to admit you were just making shlt up about me.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:11 pm

  145. Caitlyn Jenner is a long time conservative.

    So I’ve been told, Cruz Supporter. However, I was also told Caitlyn Jenner was a long time male but she seems to have changed her mind about that and that’s a crap load harder than changing political parties:)

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:13 pm

  146. Because Trumpeters are dishonest. Like their candidate.

    Well, not all of them. Let’s not paint with too broad of a brush.

    I concur that this entry highlights dishonesty, and (having given up on Rubio’s chances, even if by miracle he wins in Florida today), I’m backing Cruz.

    But I have some friends who are for Trump, and they aren’t dishonest. We actually have good discussions about the dispute, in part because they are otherwise conservative.

    Mitch (341ca0) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:20 pm

  147. WTP – sorry that is unclear to you. It is crystal clear to me.

    Did I say I didn’t understand it? Was Cruz speaking only to me? No. The point is to be clear to the media and others in one’s potential audience so that in no uncertain terms could they misunderstand. Which, by the very fact that we are having this discussion, blaming the media or “the stupid LIV” for misunderstanding, I think proves the point.

    prowlerguy gets it. But I take it you two have a history.

    WTP (5ea774) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:27 pm

  148. I’m sorry to inform you Mitch, but your friends by virtue of supporting Trump have descended to the Ninth Circle of Hell with all the other frauds, traitors and the treacherous of all walks. By being for Trump they have become the worst of the worst: BIGOTS! They are lost forever. You see Mitch, according to many here, a person of good faith could never support Trump just because he like him. No, the supporters are stupid and bigoted and have no redeeming social value. Run and save yourself before it’s too late for once one of the wise and sainted label you BIGOT! there is no return.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:51 pm

  149. Mrs. Carlito voted in the Dem primary due to local races. She did at least try to add to the chaos by voting for Bernie. 🙂

    carlitos (d7971f) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:55 pm

  150. Be clear to the media? Give me a break.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:55 pm

  151. What is so sad here is people are so wacko as to not understand even a slightly fascistic erratic Trump is much better than anyone on the Left. ANYONE. And Trumpster is not a Lefty for all his flaws.

    Signed,

    Rodney “Not a Cruz Fan Boi But Cruz Supporter” King

    Rodney King's Spirit (a089dc) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:57 pm

  152. Today’s exit polls:

    Do you think candidate is honest and trustworthy?

    In states voting today, per prelim exits:

    Kasich 72%
    Cruz 50%
    Rubio 50%
    Trump 47%
    4:22 PM – 15 Mar 2016

    I’d say people have issues with perception, those present not excepted.

    DNF (755a85) — 3/15/2016 @ 2:59 pm

  153. Give me Chile with Pinochet over Cuba with Castro any day.

    Give me Perez Jimenez in Venezuela over Chavez in Venezuela.

    Give me Chiang Kai-Shek in China over Mao in China.

    … the list goes on.

    Give me Trumpster in the USA over Any Democrat.

    Rodney King's Spirit (a089dc) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:01 pm

  154. Conservatives are exceptional because they will not fellate just anyone.

    DNF (755a85) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:01 pm

  155. Nice, Hoagie.

    JD (f1ca56) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:02 pm

  156. DNF, Kasich is a raging imbecile. A fugazy 1000 point of light douche bag sanctimonious Bushie RINO, leftist loving c**ksucker

    Take Trump over that d-bag any day.

    Rodney King's Spirit (a089dc) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:02 pm

  157. #158 Kasich is good Mayor material He can kvetch over every stray cat in the Town and use his IMMENSE POWERS for good. At least, that way, I move to another Town to avoid him.

    POTUS, dear god. Like having to sniff a loaded diaper every day while lauding how beautiful god’s poopy is. Please, rather have Bernie. At least I know.

    Rodney King's Spirit (a089dc) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:05 pm

  158. 153.What is so sad here is people are so wacko as to not understand even a slightly fascistic erratic Trump is much better than anyone on the Left.

    That may be true but “a slightly fascistic erratic” candidate is a concern. In fact, those are the opposite of the traits I would typically be looking for in a President.

    DRJ (15874d) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:05 pm

  159. 158. You forgot ‘gorged tick’.

    DNF (ffe548) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:05 pm

  160. 156.Conservatives are exceptional because they will not fellate just anyone.

    Which is why I just love the liberal chicks!

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:06 pm

  161. ** Please almost rather have Bernie.

    Rodney King's Spirit (a089dc) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:06 pm

  162. DRJ,

    A man who I greatly respected for his keen wisdom stated to me clearly that the USA needed 15-20 years of right wing fascism to clean up the mess.

    I thought it crazy 10 years ago. I no longer do. I can see the value in helping reset societal norms and expectations thru that person’s power. I also understand its dangers.

    Awful but …… what we cal Republicans and Democrats are leading us to eventual ruin. Even many so called Conservatives in their rush to “be bi partisan.”

    Rodney King's Spirit (a089dc) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:13 pm

  163. Brokered convention would be another mistake on the lake.

    mg (31009b) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:18 pm

  164. 165. Indeed, exit polls are running 60% plus feel betrayed by the Thugs.

    Anyone cozying up to GOPe vermin will be bit.

    DNF (755a85) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:33 pm

  165. “I don’t support any of the presidential candidates of either major party. I do not trust them, and I by and large do not like them. They do not represent my policy preferences, so I do not support them. How hard is that?”

    Leviticus (efada1) — 3/15/2016 @ 1:24 pm

    Yay!

    Q: How are lawyers like sperm?

    A: about 1 in a billion have a chance at being a real human being.

    Colonel Haiku (796ffc) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:39 pm

  166. I keed, I keed !!!

    Colonel Haiku (796ffc) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:40 pm

  167. I hate to point this out Rodney King’s Spirit, but fascism is not water from a spigot one can turn off and on at will. Once fascism takes hold only blood ends it. At least it’s been that way so far in history and I for one don’t need to see fascism in America any more than communism.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (eb7063) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:41 pm

  168. 155) we don’t think we need what herman kahn called ‘ideological renewal regimes’.but the #willing for hillary, may leave us no solution,

    narciso (732bc0) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:43 pm

  169. If I ever wanted to kill myself, DNF, I’d climb your ego and jump to your IQ.

    Colonel Haiku (796ffc) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:45 pm

  170. @ prowlerguy (#91), who wrote:

    Heck, even Beldar, while trying to make the case that TX is a special kind of open that doesn’t count, still slips and blames those “illegitimate” voters for costing Cruz 100% of the delegate.

    I didn’t slip, and I certainly didn’t use the word “illegitimate” to describe people who aren’t Republicans but who nevertheless voted in the GOP primary. What I called them was “Democrats.”

    prowlerguy also wrote:

    So not only are you admitting that Cruz will not get the 1237 votes to win outright, but not even a plurality of the delegates.

    No, that’s not at all what I said, nor an honest characterization of anything I’ve ever said. In fact, it’s a deeply dishonest characterization, which I believe you know. In fact, I hope and continue to expect that Cruz will get enough votes to win outright on the first ballot. But he may not; and if he doesn’t, and if no one else has a majority, then the balloting will proceed in accordance with governing law regarding each state delegations’ obligations regarding second and subsequent ballots. I would oppose any changes in the existing rules designed to give any candidate some different advantage or disadvantage than they would have under the existing rules.

    However, under those existing laws and rules, a great many delegates pledged on the first ballot to Carson or Kasich or Rubio will be released for second and subsequent ballots. Trump is unlikely to pick up their support; I think instead they’re likely to go to Cruz. But that’s nothing fishy or improper; that’s just the operation of the rules.

    Because I believe that you’re arguing in bad faith and dishonestly, prowlerguy, this will conclude our conversations here. I don’t think I’ve interacted here or elsewhere with a single Trumpkin who’s capable of carrying on a civil conversation without rank dishonesty. And you’ve now demonstrated to my personal satisfaction that you can’t. I intend to ignore you, while reserving the right to point out those of your misstatements or errors that I think are most likely to be swallowed by the gullible.

    @ Milhouse (#83): Each state sets its own rules for how delegates to the parties’ national conventions are selected. Typically it’s done at the state convention level, meaning the delegates to the national convention are selected by the delegates at the state convention, which in turn typically comprise individuals selected at the county and precinct level. There is a wide variation in how this is done; some states, I gather, do permit (as you suggest they should) some input from the candidates to whom the national convention delegates are pledged to support on the first ballot. Texas, though, doesn’t, and my impression is that very few states do permit that. This article purports to discuss some of the variations from state to state; I can’t vouch for its specifics about other states than Texas, but it’s interesting reading (and quite encouraging reading for fans of everyone but Trump).

    Re your comment in #86 — “But it [the pledge to support the GOP nominee] can’t be kept without dishonor either” — I won’t quibble with that. Nevertheless, the possibility of such dishonor ought to have been factored into the candidates’ pledges, since they knew and intended that voters would promptly start relying on those pledges in casting their votes. None of them were under any illusions about Trump when they made the pledge. If they’re going to break it now, they need, at a minimum, to apologize to every voter who may have relied upon it in whole or part — i.e., to everyone who’s already voted. And perhaps future voters will agree that their dishonor in breaking the pledge (even though they ought to have known they might feel compelled to do so) is less than the dishonor that might now accrue to them from supporting Trump if he’s the nominee.

    All they’re doing now is drumming up excitement among the Trumpkins, though, and they therefore ought to shut up about the pledge unless and until they’re willing to break it — a decision which surely can be postponed at least until we see who gets the nomination.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:47 pm

  171. Well the kids are all hopped up and ready

    to vote

    They’re ready to vote now

    They got their Ted Cruz and they’re going

    to their polling place to to vote now

    But she just couldn’t take

    His riot take away

    But Donald Trump really has it all

    Oh yeah, oh yeah

    Sheena is a Trump voter

    Sheena is a Trump voter

    Sheena is a Trump voter now

    Trump Trump, a Trump voter

    Trump Trump, a Trump voter

    Trump Trump, a Trump voter

    pinandpuller (a12946) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:49 pm

  172. > and I certainly didn’t use the word “illegitimate” to describe people who aren’t Republicans but who nevertheless voted in the GOP primary

    I will note that I have openly proclaimed myself to be a non-Republican who is planning to reregister as a Republican and vote in the Republican primary, and neither Beldar nor anyone else has called me illegitimate.

    aphrael (e0cdc9) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:55 pm

  173. Also FWIW, re open primaries and strategic spoiling votes: I’m a fourth generation Texas Republican. For all of my great-grandfather’s & grand-father’s lives, and for most of my father’s (1922-2009), Texas was a one-party state dominated by Democrats. Democrats typically ran unopposed by the GOP in all state-wide elections. My great-grandfather, grandfather, father, and (before the mid-1990s) I have all voted, from time to time, in the Democratic primary in order to vote for the most conservative Democrat running in all state-wide races, while then voting for the few (if any) Republicans running for state offices, plus the Republican presidential nominee, in the general election.

    So I wouldn’t ever use the word “illegitimate” to describe those strategic spoiling votes. Indeed, I know several Texas Democrats who did exactly that — who voted in the GOP primary a couple of weeks ago — specifically so they could vote against both Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. Most of them voted for Rubio, who struck them as the most likely to be able to help block Trump in other states. I understand what these friends were doing, and they remain friends.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:57 pm

  174. I drink to your parents’ marriage, aphrael! And if they’re still alive, to their continued health, however you or they may vote.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 3:57 pm

  175. Col. H: I’m going to steal that lawyer joke (#167), and I’ll trade you one for it:

    Do you know why research scientists and product testing laboratories are replacing rats with lawyers as their test subjects?

    Three reasons: Lawyers are more plentiful; the staff doesn’t get nearly as fond of them; and there are some things you just can’t make a rat do.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:01 pm

  176. How about a dedicated Election Night thread? Why not?

    ropelight (a633bc) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:02 pm

  177. How about a lawyer joke thread?
    laughing is good.

    mg (31009b) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:07 pm

  178. Earliest Florida results are coming in with less than 1% reporting:

    Trump 62.3%

    Rubio 17.9%

    Cruz 15.5%

    Kasich 7.7%

    ropelight (a633bc) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:09 pm

  179. Lawyer joke
    (don’t stop me if you remember this one)

    A doctor, an engineer, and a lawyer were discussing which of their professions was first mentioned in the Bible –
    The doctor eagerly pipes up,
    “Medicine! Right in the beginning God does an operation to take a rib out of Adam!”
    The engineer replies with a smile,
    “But before that God made the heavens and the earth, that’s engineering!”
    The lawyer smirks and says,
    “Hah! I’ve got you both beat! It says that before God did anything there was chaos. Where do you think that came from?”

    MD not exactly in Philly (b0439a) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:11 pm

  180. Update on Florida Results – 7% reporting:

    Trump 47.9

    Rubio 22.7%

    Curz 15.5%

    Kasich 7.3%

    ropelight (a633bc) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:12 pm

  181. @jb (#71) & Luke Stywalker (#73), re “strumpet” as a term for Trump supporters: I agree with Luke that this might unfairly malign members of the world’s oldest profession. But there are a ton of Trump supporters who are still flying at about 50,000 feet and who haven’t even heard of “Trump University,” for example. The ones who show up here to volunteer to murder children for Trump lie for Trump spread misinformation that favors Trump are worse than simple suckers who’ve been conned by a world-class con man. But there must be at least 10 simple suckers for every active co-conspirator in the con-job, and I have hopes for their education and redemption in due course once Trump’s defeated for the GOP nomination.

    Beldar (fa637a) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:16 pm

  182. Once fascism takes hold only blood ends it.

    If there is any fascism lurking around the corner in America (not to mention the Western World in general), it’s far more likely to take the form of conventional Islamism intertwined with Jews-are-meanies-Palestinians-are-victims, college-campus intellectualism.

    Fascism as associated with Europe in the first half of the 20th century isn’t likely to pop up in the 21st century due to the strength of modern-day political correctness and the ethos of very secular compassion for compassion’s sake—eg, polls that point to younger Americans being more liberal than in the past.

    Mark (6c93d5) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:19 pm

  183. How about a lawyer joke thread?
    laughing is good.
    mg (31009b) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:07 pm

    It won’t work. There are only three lawyer jokes. All the other stories are true.

    nk (dbc370) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:19 pm

  184. ropelight has the latest breaking news with 12.73421% of precincts.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:21 pm

  185. Florida Update, 29% of polls reporting:

    Trump 45.4%

    Rubio 27.3%

    Cruz 15.6%

    Kasich 6.5%

    ropelight (a633bc) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:26 pm

  186. Patter-EE-koh = d-LOOS-SHUN-AL

    SILLY SAM (8417ec) — 3/15/2016 @ 4:44 pm

  187. That’s a good one, Beldar!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 3/15/2016 @ 5:24 pm

  188. Once fascism takes hold only blood ends it.

    And as I understand it, Generalisimo Francisco Franco is still dead. Though I’m pretty sure he died in his sleep. At least the last time.

    WTP (094b61) — 3/15/2016 @ 5:41 pm

  189. This is an old media strategy, and Cruz knows it because they used the tactic against him when he was talking about a border fence. They pick out one Republican and say how dangerous and violent he is. Other Republicans who have policy disagreements with him, go along with it to further their own agenda. Then they pick out another Republican and different Republicans go along with it to further their own ends. All that the low-information voter ever sees is that everyone seems to be constantly down on one Republican or another for being dangerous and violent. They all must be dangerous and violent.

    I’ve really lost a lot of respect for Cruz over this. The only legitimate response to questions over an incident like this is to refuse to take the bait and insist on talking about how the Left started it, how the Left is always starting these things, and how the press is always trying to find a way to blame the Republicans. Any other response is playing into the hands of the people who are destroying civilization.

    Cugel (9ce6f4) — 3/15/2016 @ 9:26 pm

  190. Unlike the above tweets, I favored Cruz in the beginning…never Rubio…but Carson got my interest up…never thought he could make it, but liked him. Cruz lost me several weeks back when he, along with Marco, seemed to go “high school” against Trump…Rubio looked childish with his taunts and that gave him away. I still look at Cruz, but he seems to have become “harder”….as for Trump, what a choice!!! It’s either Donald or Hillary and of the two, I’ll go with Trump…Hil is proven liar, distorter of the truth, appears to be blind, deaf and dumb to win. We, America is in a world of hurt and I blame the RINO’s for their duplicity….

    Sue (e5a399) — 3/16/2016 @ 10:50 am

  191. Why do so many people want to take away my opportunity to vote? I’m glad that it looks like a longer race.
    I’m in a later voting state and I am tired of all of the “it’s over”, “the others need to get in line and support——“, “the winner has already been chosen”, “—— needs to drop out”, hoopla. Let everyone have a chance!

    Sue (Not the Other One) (758c11) — 3/16/2016 @ 11:11 am

  192. I don’t think the Trump camp would be so stupid as to paste the identical tweet over and over, so my deduction would be that whoever is doing it, they are doing it to create “evidence” of fraud from the Trump camp. If that is true, then it might be someone who is trying to create division and confusion among Trump/Cruz voters. I’m a Trump supporter, but I’ll be happy if either he or Ted wins. From what I’ve read, Trump and Cruz have both vowed to make sure there is no contested convention, which means one of them will have to send their voters to help the other make the majority. And as of today, with Trump at 673 delegates, and Cruz at 411 delegates, the choice is clear. But if Trump asked me to vote for Cruz, I would in a heartbeat. Establishment, YOU ARE ON NOTICE!

    dg (e3addc) — 3/17/2016 @ 6:35 am

  193. I can only speak for myself but I was a Cruz supporter until Friday night. Cruz lacked the moral courage to stand up for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, all to take a cheap shot at a political competitor.

    Would he stand up 100% behind MY freedom of speech and MY freedom of assembly if elected? I’m not so sure.

    I’d made several contributions, albeit small, but after Friday I unsubscribed to his emails.

    Whitehall (d62df5) — 3/17/2016 @ 6:35 am

  194. 😆
    (lol)

    Yoda (feee21) — 3/18/2016 @ 8:03 pm


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1620 secs.