Patterico's Pontifications

7/21/2016

A Message to Anyone Who Criticizes Ted Cruz for Standing Up for His Family

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:49 am



I have said since May 3 that refusing to endorse Donald Trump would be smart politics for Ted Cruz. Here are my thoughts from May 3:

Later that day, Cruz pulled out of the race. He remained mostly silent about Trump. As the other toadies like Rubio, Scott Walker, and (sadly) Rick Perry fell in line, I mocked them without mercy — and pledged that I would do the same to Cruz if he endorsed Trump.

I remained skeptical that he would endorse — but when I heard that Cruz planned to speak at the convention, I worried. To me, any endorsement of Trump, even half-assed or tepid, would have been an act of disrespect to Ted Cruz’s family. Even if he didn’t endorse, I worried that Cruz would try to walk a line and end up being too clever by half.

It still could have played out that way. But then Donald Trump’s people orchestrated the booing of Ted Cruz, for not explicitly endorsing Trump.

It was a wholly premeditated spectacle. The bully Trump planned it this way. It was to be the final humiliation of “Lyin’ Ted.”

And yet, Ted Cruz stood firm.

And with that, a speech that could have been perceived as a standard-issue extolling of constitutionalism was transformed into an epic stand on principle.

I opened this post by noting that standing on principle is Cruz’s brand. His speech last night was calculating, I believe — but the calculation was: I am the sort of person who stands on principle. My supporters like that. I am going to continue to be that sort of person.

That’s my kind of “calculation.” Especially when it comes to defending family.

Anyone criticizing Cruz today has to be willing to say: “Donald Trump could mock my wife’s looks, and slander my dad, and I would support him.” If that’s the sort of person you are — the sort of person who does not respect his family enough to stand up for them, regardless of the cost — then stand up and say so. Be proud. Own it.

And then get off my site.

If you’re voting for Donald Trump because you think he’s the lesser of two evils; because you think Hillary is clearly worse; because you reject leftism and know Hillary will foist leftism on us and only suspect Trump might . . . then you and I are cool. I respect that position. It’s not my position — but if it’s yours, I respect it, and I respect you.

But if you’re going to knock Ted Cruz for standing up against a man who bullied his family, I don’t respect you. I don’t want you here. Feel free to leave. It may make this place smaller, but it will make it better.

I do not want to see this site turned into a replication of what I watched on the convention floor last night: a group of howling apes flinging poo at a good man who stood on principle and refused to kiss the ring of a man who repeatedly insulted his family.

The GOP ought to be taking out the trash, but they’re not. I can’t control that. But I can control my space. If you can’t respect a man who stands up for his family, get out of my face.

459 Responses to “A Message to Anyone Who Criticizes Ted Cruz for Standing Up for His Family”

  1. Whether this means bannings or not, I will have to see.

    I’d prefer self-deportation. Let the flouncing begin!

    Patterico (72bd42)

  2. I don’t fault Cruz for not endorsing Trump.

    However, I think it a tad rude to ‘crash’ Trump’s party and not endorse him. The point of the convention was to (try to) show GOP unity and rallying around the nominee. If Cruz wasn’t willing to do that, he should have stayed home.

    steve (27c637)

  3. “he’s the lesser of two evils”

    This.

    Steve (9b6b7f)

  4. I would not consider this to be Trump’s party; rather it is the RNC’s party, and Cruz represents a sizeable group, even if not a majority, of the party. He spoke exactly as I’d hoped he would, and as Trump deserved.

    I’m amused at the usual suspects out proclaiming that his career is over, yada yada yada. We’ll see…

    rlb (798eac)

  5. However, I think it a tad rude to ‘crash’ Trump’s party and not endorse him.

    Cruz still thinks the GOP can be constitutionalist. He earned a lot of votes. He had a lot of delegates there. Trump
    Invited him. Trump knew what he was going to say.

    It ain’t crashing a party if you’re invited, my friend.

    Patterico (72bd42)

  6. I just posted the following as a comment on William J. J. Hoge’s blog before I came here and read your post, Patterico. Since it’s 100% relevant, I’ll repost it here as well:

    If Trump had not made vicious, below-the-belt attacks on Cruz’s wife and utter lies about Cruz’s father, I might agree with [a previous commenter on Hoge’s site who said “Bush, Kasich, Cruz – they did not uphold their pledge, not to Trump, but to voters”]. As it stands, I find Trump’s behavior towards Cruz abhorrent, and hold him released from his pledge with regard to Trump.

    If Cruz had refused to endorse, say, Kasich (in the alternate universe where Kasich stood a ghost of a chance) I would find him to be in breach of promise. But I feel that Trump broke the contract first, and so Cruz is not obligated to uphold it. His coming to the convention anyway, and telling Republicans not to sit this election out but to vote for conservative candidates up and down the ballot, was extremely classy given what Trump did. I hope Trump will return the favor and apologize for his past behavior, but I have to admit I’m not holding my breath.

    Robin Munn (328f66)

  7. I think you certainly make a fair point, and I absolutely agree with you that the stuff with the wives, and the JFK assassination plot was over the line, but I generally think the families, should be left out of these things.

    I didn’t think Cruz would endorse last night, I thought it would be nice in a fantasy kind of way, but as you note there are certain things you can’t come back from. I thought the best way forward, once Rubio was out, was for Cruz and Trump to forge an alliance, they had vanquished the “establishment” at that point it was pretty clear Trump was going to secure the nomination, even after Wisconsin. There was no way Cruz was winning in the Northeast. Trump outperformed and then never looked back, and the former amicable relationship continued to degrade until Cruz dropped out.

    I just don’t think it needed to go down that way last night, even if Cruz gave the same speech. My issue is not with the content of the speech but delivery. He started off off offering congratulations, and I figured that was his passing reference to the situation and he’d move forward with some speech on what’s at stake, etc. What built from there was a subtle build toward what appeared to be leading to an endorsement. He had the crowd eating out of his hand, I couldn’t believe what I was watching. I’m sitting there thinking “he might actually do it”, and I think if your honest, even as a Cruz booster proud of what he did, you may have been thinking “oh no… he’s actually going to do it” He then pulled the Lucy/Charlie Brown football move, and once the crowd realized they’d been had momentarily, it was easy for Manafort to drum up the boos. The content of the speech was fine, the structure and delivery were troubling.

    Trump is the nominee, everything to the negative that has happened this week has been either the typical “mis-steps” by his campaign, which lets be honest, have not really had much impact over the last 13 months, other than maybe delay him slightly in locking the nomination up, or deliberate attempts to embarrass the campaign. That was the whole point of the non-sense on the floor the other day, that was the point of the Cruz speech, and that’s been the MO of many of the more vocal in the #nevertrump movement.

    If your on the fence about Hillary being worse that Trump, or know that Hillary would be worse than Trump but still hate Trump, than I think the best thing for people to do, is just step aside and let things play out as opposed to undermining everything.

    As bad as people may think Trump is, it’s absolutely shocking to me that after waging war with the Clintons for damn near 30 years, we’re going to roll over and hand them the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

    Dr. Shatterhand (62bc16)

  8. i love my family i hope nobody does stinkypig on them

    what’s the number one important thing you can do when you go to one of these convention things?

    beat that stinkypig!

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  9. when they’ve taken your guns, shuttered the churches, and shut down the fracking, never mind this blog is already filtered in most govt buildings, well it will have been worth it,

    narciso (732bc0)

  10. Powerline has the same take on it as me:


    DID CRUZ MISCALCULATE?

    I get Cruz not wanting to endorse Trump after the things he said about Cruz’s wife and father, but it seems to me and quite a few others that he’s angling for 2020 as well. I think he’s actually destroyed his chances for 2020.

    Gerald A (945582)

  11. I share your assessment of both Trump and Cruz but have difficulty seeing how presenting himself as the Conscience of Conservatives is going to work any better for Cruz than it did for Goldwater. Ironically, I think they both got what they wanted out of the Cruz appearance. Time will tell if Cruz got the better of this but I’m afraid he got outflanked again by a wily and opportunistic reality show star.

    crazy (fcf2fd)

  12. Hear hear, Patterico.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  13. If you’re voting for Donald Trump because you think he’s the lesser of two evils….

    Because he is a great man at the right time.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  14. However, I think it a tad rude to ‘crash’ Trump’s party and not endorse him.

    Meh, Donald and his campaign can take it. Cruz called for party unity and supporting down-ticket candidates, which is important, plus said that supporting the up ticket candidate based on one’s conscious is legitimate. All in all, I’m glad Cruz spoke.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  15. *conscience

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  16. 2020? Are these people crazy? If we don’t win now there will be no chance at 20anything. Leftists will be in power for decades. Dr. Shatterhand is right. We’ve been fighting against the Klintons, people like them and all they stand for 30 years and now some of you are not voting to defeat her? If you don’t vote for Trump then you’re helping Klinton. Period.

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6)

  17. 2020? Are these people crazy? If we don’t win now there will be no chance at 20anything.

    ^

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  18. I think Cruz should have declined an opportunity to speak at the convention if he did not plan on supporting Trump.
    It’s not that I “suspect Trump may foist leftism” on us. It’s that I believe maybe he’s telling us the truth about what he plans to do as President. The track record for political candidates and presidents is not good. From “read my lips” to “you can keep your doctor if you like” history has not instilled confidence. Perhaps Trump will. I would hope so. We actually KNOW what hillary will do. You cannot claim to honestly KNOW what Trump will do. Any efforts to undermine his candidacy will only lend support to a supreme court stacked with leftists and more state secrets sold to the highest bidder. Anyone who knows this and continues to do what they can to undermine Trump MUST be a closet hillary supporter. Let’s give Trump a chance.

    Jim (a9b7c7)

  19. Please.

    Donald saw the speech before it was delivered – and let Cruz deliver it. Why would he do that? Because nothing is better for Trump than the party uniting behind him in hatred of Cruz.

    Cruz just destroyed his political future, and helped Donald. Tell me, was that his plan?

    His best bet would have to stayed clear of the convention altogether and not endorse.

    People get stupid when their family is threatened, and Donald took advantage of that.

    Geoman (5699b1)

  20. Like it or not, elections are the vehicle for determining governance.
    Whose “principles” will rule the country for the next four years?
    Politics is about the country.
    Nations have gone to war with one another because someone got called names or had their ego bruised publicly.

    What the Alinskyites want to do is light years more damaging than a jerk such as Trump publicly telling you that your wife is ugly.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  21. Sounds like it’s time for somebody to retire to his Safe Space.

    tom swift (8c2201)

  22. Like it or not, elections are the vehicle for determining governance.
    Whose “principles” will rule the country for the next four years?
    Politics is about the country.

    This is what I call prioritizing.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  23. Pat: agreed, ‘crash’ was the wrong word to use. I still think it was poor form to show up at what is basically someone’s coronation if you’re not going to at least pretend to support the celebrant.

    This isn’t to say he should have shown up and faked support, I’m fine with him withholding support. He should’ve stayed away.

    FWIW, I’m not a Trump fan, nor did I vote for Cruz, I believe in the long-forgotten art of being civil.

    steve (27c637)

  24. My dislike for Hillary Clinton runs very deep, as does my concern for our beloved American culture, which seems to be careening out of control. These last few weeks, events here and abroad have been especially horrifying. The prospect of Mrs. Clinton in the White House with the acceleration of our cultural devolution as her top priority is beyond frightening. Trump may be “playing” his supporters, but in an environment like this, it doesn’t take much to co-opt a legitimately fearful electorate. Desperation is an ugly thing, but in this circumstance quite understandable. It should also be forgivable.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  25. I was disgusted listening to Ted. Before too many panties get in a wad here, I voted for Cruz in the Texas primary. I’m so sick of phony “Christian conservatives” attacking Donald Trump. Erick Erickson comes to mind as someone completely un-hinged. “Principles???” What principles? Sending Hillary to the White House. Erickson and company are chomping at the bit to do just that. The hatred for Trump is ridiculous. Okay, so he’s rude, brash, arrogant and every other ungodly adjective you can come up with.
    If Trump seals the border, stops the Muslim invasion of America and appoints conservative Supreme Court justices … like he said he would, and I think he’s arrogant enough to do those things, that’s good enough for me. If we don’t get a grip on those issues we’re not going to have a republic to worry about. And we’ll be waking up to the call to prayer over loud speakers.
    Cruz along with 15 other candidates got beat … bad, fair and square so suck it up. I think Ted got just what he deserved after his speech. He along with the 15 other candidates were too delicate to win and they still are.

    steve (7776a7)

  26. Cruz only has a problem if Trump wins AND is a success as president. The first may happen. The second is a long-shot.

    Judging how people turned on McCain, who deserved it, and on Romney, who didn’t, if Trump loses there won’t be a Trumpie to be found by December and everyone will have been in the Resistance. And then Cruz’ talk about principle and the Constitution will be remembered.

    And if Trump wins, and is the kind of president that we lot expect (statist/nationalist/populist)? The Ted’s talk about principle and the Constitution and the core of TEA PARTY values will be remembered as the shards of the old, dead, GOP reform as the Tea Party for 2020.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  27. I don’t see it mentioned here, maybe I missed it,
    Ben Shapiro and others are saying the Trump people had seen the speech, had cleared it, knew what Cruz was going to say and did not object to it,
    and then,
    orchestrated the booing.

    What I read seemed pretty dogmatic about it with references, even with Trump saying he knew about it.

    What do people think about that?

    It is a pretty inflammatory claim,
    But I think it would fit Trump completely,
    a petty tyrant like Obama,
    Ideologically committed to his own success.

    If so, it was Trump who blew it up, not Cruz,
    I guess we will see what shakes out.

    Back to work.

    MD in Philly (f00ab0)

  28. Cruz only has a problem if Trump wins AND is a success as president.

    Wrong. If Trump loses big, Cruz is seen as prescient. If Trump loses narrowly, Cruz is seen as culpable.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  29. Ideologically committed to his own success.

    Are you a capitalist or a communist?

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  30. Cruz only has a problem if Trump wins AND is a success as president. The first may happen. The second is a long-shot.

    And you know what? If Trump wins AND governs as the kind of second-coming-of-Reagan that people are hoping for (and that I’m pretty sure won’t happen), then all of us win, because we actually have a president that cares about the Constitution. Which is precisely what Cruz says he cares about the most. So if you take Cruz at his word (and I do), then he’ll be as happy as I’ll be if Trump turns out to be a good, conservative president.

    Mark my words: if Trump turns out to be another Reagan, I will be VERY happy to admit publicly that I was wrong about him, and that he was the complete opposite of a disaster. I would really LIKE to be wrong, here.

    Robin Munn (328f66)

  31. I don’t see it mentioned here, maybe I missed it,
    Ben Shapiro and others are saying the Trump people had seen the speech, had cleared it, knew what Cruz was going to say and did not object to it,
    and then,
    orchestrated the booing.

    What I read seemed pretty dogmatic about it with references, even with Trump saying he knew about it.

    What do people think about that?

    It is a pretty inflammatory claim,
    But I think it would fit Trump completely,
    a petty tyrant like Obama,
    Ideologically committed to his own success.

    If so, it was Trump who blew it up, not Cruz,
    I guess we will see what shakes out.

    Back to work.

    I tried to articulate this thing above, but didn’t maybe as fully as I’ve done elsewhere.
    I haven’t tried to read the transcript, since I saw it live, but I would suspect that it reads very much differently than it was delivered. It’s quite possible and likely that they were at the ready with the boos, and I certainly was not in the arena, but the volume of the boos from watching on CSPAN seems more than just orchestrating the NY delegation. Are there a lot of Trump people there ? Certainly, but there are also a lot of conservatives who practically worship Cruz.

    A skilled orator can give context that is unspoken, and I think Cruz did this, lead everyone to thinking he would forgive all and endorse, and then pull the rug out from underneath the audience that was eating out of his hand.

    I don’t really take exception to anything Cruz said, I think it was the structure and delivery that created the situation.

    Dr. Shatterhand (62bc16)

  32. To me, the question is: should Senator Cruz have attended the convention at all? My sainted mother would have said that no, if you cannot say something nice about someone, then you shouldn’t say anything at all.

    That Senator Cruz was right in not endorsing Donald Trump is something with which I agree, but it’s my belief that he should have just stayed home in Texas. Everyone would understand that he wasn’t endorsing Mr Trump by doing that, and there’d be fewer people calling him a sore loser.

    Mr Cruz wasn’t being Reagan; he was being Regan, from The Exorcist, peeing on the carpet.

    The conservative Dana (f6a568)

  33. I’m ideologically committed to my own success. For the record.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  34. Trump is neither, is my point.
    I have always said that Trump is better, if only marginally, because he is not ideologically a leftist like Obama and (Sec.) Clinton.

    I am a believer in capitalism that is self-constrained by love of God and love of neighbor as oneself.

    Trump is not one of those, either.

    MD in Philly (f00ab0)

  35. I understand the “You came after my family, you’re dead to me” sentiment held by Cruz and his supporters (full disclosure: I voted for Cruz in the primary) BUT there is a time and a place and I’m not sure last night was it.

    I would have rather seen him parlay whatever pull he had into making Trump guarantee him a nomination for SCOTUS. If we can’t have a President Cruz, Justice Cruz is the next best thing.

    SaveFarris (b93239)

  36. Cruz’s stock *should* go up for what he did.

    People will go after him for reneging on “the pledge”. If I were Cruz, I would talk about my wedding vows this morning, and talk about which is “pledge” is more important to him, as a man.

    If people can’t relate to that, there is something unusually craven about their thinking.

    Kman (7c5484)

  37. Dana,
    But what if Cruz had indeed planned what he did with the apparent tacit approval of Trump?
    Before the booing started, I thought it was a fine job furthering the Republican cause without betraying his marriage vows.

    MD in Philly (f00ab0)

  38. Bravo, Pat

    KEW (7289ba)

  39. I particularly dislike the “too cleaver by half” meme that slow-witted conservative pundits have taken to using against Cruz. In the years since the departure of Newt Gingrich from the House, the general condition of Republican pols and pundits has been “not-cleaver-enough by half,” with the current election cycle constituting the low-water mark. Time and again, over the past few months, I have been left wondering why Republican Party nomination contenders, party leaders, and, especially, the conservative punditocracy seem determined to live up to the “stupid party” stereotype.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  40. bla bla bla, if the last month and a half, haven’t underlined the deadly import of this election, I don’t know what to tell, playing games that risk the consequences we’ve seen in france, just this week, the discord that defeated brexit for the near future,

    narciso (732bc0)

  41. One wonders: will Senator Cruz endorse Gary Johnson?

    The libertarian Dana (f6a568)

  42. What many are missing this morning is that Cruz didn’t speak at the Convention for himself or Trump, but for the thousands of Republicans that are running down ticket that are being crushed due to Trump’s ignorance and laziness since clinching the nomination months ago. That was a full throated plea for people to get out and vote in local and state races, make sure we don’t lose any ground due to the ineffectual leadership of Trump and his disorganized general campaign. Ted stood on principles last night, and I applaud every word he uttered, but he also backed everyone running in November not named Trump. For that, he was booed, a whipped up orchestrated effort by a man who has yet to even attempt to mend fences with Cruz or have the decency to apologize for his attacks on his family. Trump is the candidate, not Cruz, it’s Trump’s job to unite the party, not Cruz’s. Many people this morning are mad at the wrong guy, for the wrong reasons.

    Sean (221079)

  43. Cruz Supporter – Cruz being consistent is better for him, better for Trump, better for the GOP – regardless of the results of the election.

    Trump will win or lose his own race. The GOP will help at the margins, because Trump is doing it his own way, damn all prior practice.

    We will see.

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  44. The picture the Rt Rev Hoagie linked shows Mrs Trump posing in front of an American flag. Thing is, it’s a 48 star American flag!

    The Dana who noticed (f6a568)

  45. False choice. Cruz could have simply said, “I do not agree with or approve of the way Donald personally attacked members of my family. I wish he would acknowledge that he made a mistake. However, I agree with his stated positions far more that with Hillary’s, and therefore I am endorsing him for president.”

    Some Dude (53806b)

  46. Heh! Melania is a much a patriot as she is an architect. Or a model, for that matter.

    nk (dbc370)

  47. Man, they cannot even do a photoshop right.

    nk (dbc370)

  48. Nobody criticizes Cruz for defending comments about his family in the rough and tumble arena of national politics. On the contrary. He did that weeks ago. Ed Muskie did back in ’72 on the steps of a newspaper, too.

    The fact lay simply that in the profession he has chosen, Ted Cruz broke his pledge– that is, his word– to support the party nominee. That is a move you cannot respect. And it certainly is not a stand on ‘principle’ unless your principles are those of Cuthbert J. Twillie. More obvious, it is a move of self-centered expedience.

    There’s is no qualifier for “so’s your old man” name calling in that pledge.

    Ted may try to invent one. His loyalists might try to create one. But there isn’t one. And for them, his rejection by primary voters is a bitter pill. Or just sour grapes. The team won’t join Ted so he can take his ball and go home to Texas. If he wants to try a run as an indy, go for it. But deep pocketed donors have slammed the door in his face already. Cruz is likely finished in the GOP on a national ticket.

    As a wag noted today on one of the morning shows, time for Ted to put his ‘big boy’ pants on. He has had his helping of electrons and ink for this election cycle and be old news by Friday.

    Scan the polls. The chances Trump may win this in the end are very real, given the weakness of the other candidate. And that should alarm everyone.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  49. Jeez, I almost agree with DCSA at 48, except for his whiney last sentence.

    Some Dude (53806b)

  50. Thing is, it’s a 48 star American flag!

    Minus California and …?

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  51. Ted accepted a party invitation, came, then proceeded to publicly tell the host that he sucks. Zero class.

    Boris (bc52ec)

  52. Another Powerline analysis concludes the same thing. Cruz has destroyed his future chances.

    Is Ted Cruz finished nationally?

    Read the comments. Pretty much everyone is trashing him.

    Gerald A (945582)

  53. It is hard to say who fears and hates Cruz more — Trump’s queers or Hillary’s queers.

    nk (dbc370)

  54. So Cruz violated the very pledge which Trump threw aside during the primary. In Trump speak, Trump broke the contract, it’s null and void. Cruz isn’t obligated to keep his promise if the contract is invalid and the candidate never apologized for slandering his family. And, if Trump is such a conservative firebrand how exactly is it bad to say, “support the candidates that protect freedom and the Constitution?”

    Sean (221079)

  55. It’s Paul Mirengoff; what do you expect?

    ThOR (c9324e)

  56. Ted accepted a party invitation, came, then proceeded to publicly tell the host that he sucks. Zero class.

    Boris (bc52ec) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:37 am

    Wrong. Ted told Trump he wasn’t going to endorse him, was still invited and then Trump ginned up his supporters to make Ted look bad. So who’s classless here?

    Sean (221079)

  57. I have a slightly different take to add. The more I thought about it the more it seemed that Trump is making a free speech jab at the Democrats. Trump said he had seen Cruz’s speech and said fine let him go on anyway. In the RNC there have been speakers the MSNBC has mocked as little unimportant people and speakers like Cruz that were part of the 2016 race that are not behind Trump. Trump gave the people a voice and essentially his RNC enemies a voice. Trump did not stack the deck in his favor. This seemed to me to be a statement that if I win I will listen to the regular American people and I will not use my authority to shut up those who are against me.

    Given the focus by the Democrats on elites and STFU if you don’t agree with them Fascism, it seemed a welcome change.

    Disclaimer: I am an Idependent who hoped Giuliani would run and who liked Webb on the DNC side. I voted in the primary for Cruz but will be voting in the general election for who ever has the best chance of betting Hillary. Now is not the time to pout and stand on principles and ya da ya da. The SCOTUS is endanger and if the democrats flood this country with voters (illegal’s, faux refugees) beholden to them (note how Obama is only saving Muslims but leaving Christians, Jews, Yazidis, to die in ME) then the US is over. IMHO never trump needs to buck up and fight Hillary in a viable way to keep her out of the White House. If this means Trump then it means Trump. The rest of us give you full rights to vote for him in this emergency and still tell us all “I told you so” . Plus if it turns out he is the pffft you say then fine we impeach him and the VP is POTUS. No one on either side of congress would have issues with impeaching him if he turns out bad. If Hillary gets in impeaching her will not help as her VP will be progressive so still lose SCOTUS and immigration plus the Democrats would fight an impeachment of Hillary.

    Summerwarmth (4123cb)

  58. Apology for typing on small key board and typos on the note above. Nothing like commenting on the go and in a hurry.

    Summerwarmth (4123cb)

  59. I think we only disagree on Cruz’s motivation for giving a speech in that setting, and we will never know the true reason, because Cruz will never tell. I think he would have had much more impact as a principled man if he had attended the convention and declined to speak. I think he wanted the huge audience, so he took the podium. And BTW I voted for Cruz in the primary.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  60. What Sean said.
    Cruz was “endorsing Trump enough” for many of the people who did not vote for Trump and still don’t want to.

    Maybe my posts are invisible.
    The claim is out there that Trump set it up to humiliate Cruz.
    Does that not make a difference if it is or isn’t true?

    What was it Trump said about the military carrying out illegal commands and getting away with shooting someone in the middle of the street?

    The really, really, really bad thing is
    narciso and Hoagie are correct,
    Clinton is worse.

    But it appears Trump is consistently trying to see how bad he can get and still be better.

    MD in Philly (f00ab0)

  61. DCSCA you are a concern troll, who’s every utterence here is a lie.

    As you are banking on, Trump is going to lose the race, because he does not believe he has to work hard to win – he does not believe he has to have a political machine doing the ward heeling, old fashioned retail politics.

    If Trump actually acted the way his kids portrayed him acting, he would have a chance. But he won’t. He has not. He is a con man.

    This is really Hillary’s election to lose, where it should be any R candidate’s election in the bag.

    And you know this – all the while pretending to be a Trump supporter.

    F’n moby.

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  62. And, if Trump is such a conservative firebrand how exactly is it bad to say, “support the candidates that protect freedom and the Constitution?”
    Sean (221079) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:42 am

    That line is not what has created the uproar. Where have you been? It is pretty much the universal impression that Cruz was trying to undermine Trump. And why? It seems inescapable to most everyone that it was a calculation about 2020.

    And if it was a calculation, he badly miscalculated.

    Gerald A (945582)

  63. It’s Paul Mirengoff; what do you expect?

    ThOR (c9324e) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:43 am

    Mirengoff voted for Cruz.

    Gerald A (945582)

  64. Ted accepted a party invitation, came, then proceeded to publicly tell the host that he sucks. Zero class.

    Boris

    Ted was entitled to be there, still gave his speech to the Trump campaign to look at. They approved it. If you found a section where Cruz said Trump sucks please quote it. Like others I’ve asked to put up or shut up in this thread, I suspect I shouldn’t hold my breath.

    Trump’s campaign organized booing of Cruz in yet another stunning show of incompetence. It’s not up to Cruz to unify the party… that’s on Trump and he just divided it because their campaign thrives on this kind of OH MY GOSH thirty second scandal crap. But Cruz gave Trump the path to unify the party. All Trump would need to do is follow Cruz’s lead.

    Did you complain when Trump smeared Cruz’s wife and dad? You say you’re concerned about class, so I’m sure I missed when you did.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  65. Gerald, you’re on a roll today, making claims you can’t support.

    It is pretty much the universal impression that Cruz was trying to undermine Trump.

    Quote that part of the speech.

    It’s also not a universal impression, and you know that as you’ve been arguing for hours with people ho say it Cruz wasn’t doing that.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  66. I think Cruz not being there, or being there and not speaking, would have spoken more negatively than what he said. He showed up, said the Dems needed to be defeated, get out and vote in November.

    He said everything necessary short of the phrase:
    I endorse the jacka** that made fun of my wife and slandered my father,

    if that wasn’t good enough for Trump, he should have said so,
    rather than demonstrating the Chicago way for those who won’t kiss his whatever.

    MD in Philly (f00ab0)

  67. DCSCA you are a concern troll, who’s every utterence here is a lie.

    Steve Malynn, you’re just doing an ad hominem because you can’t deal with the content. Clearly DCSCA represents a point of view. I know he does, because I agree with much of it. It isn’t alone.

    But you simply try to discredit those who you disagree with, rather than acknowledge there are other perspectives, genuinely.

    Very embarrassing, Steve. Ironically, you discredit yourself.

    You don’t have to like the guy to acknowledge he has different opinions, shared by millions of Americans.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  68. And before I have to go…I am very happy that we finally have a convention and an election that is real and not just a stultifying kabuki of democracy!

    Patricia (5fc097)

  69. This internecine fighting is for teh birds…

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  70. But the chronology undermines the view that Cruz’s conduct yesterday was rooted in principled conservatism.

    yes yes poor butthurt snowflake Ted showed everyone he does not know how to put the country first

    it’s all about his feewings

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  71. Trump was given plenty to work with to unify the party,
    and he blew it up instead
    and made it harder for the
    historically
    huge number of people who voted against him to vote for him after all.

    MD in Philly (f00ab0)

  72. Summerwarmth, I’d like to see Giuliani run as well. I probably wouldn’t vote for him, but he’s establishment with a record. Beats the snot out of Rubio and Romney candidates, who are pretty faces with short records in office, and come across as puppets sometimes.

    I also agree that it was good to see the GOP have different voices at the convention. While Trump did approve Cruz’s speech, this was a courtesy. Cruz was entitled to speak because of the millions of Republicans who voted for him. Still, good point. The GOP should be open to different points of view.

    What we see in this thread is three factions. Trump’s supporters, Die Hard partisans, and Conservatives. The first two seem to overlap lately, although they were at odds a few months ago. It’s the die hard partisans that bother me the most. These guys will say things they know aren’t true because they think fear of democrats justify lying. They really just lose credibility and weaken the party from within, and it’s the die hard partisans who have made the GOP meaningless.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  73. That line is not what has created the uproar. Where have you been? It is pretty much the universal impression that Cruz was trying to undermine Trump. And why? It seems inescapable to most everyone that it was a calculation about 2020.

    And if it was a calculation, he badly miscalculated.

    Gerald A (945582) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:48 am

    Really? Hmmm, well I’ve been all over the right and alt-right blogs this morning, it seems conscience is now considered a dog-whistle, Cruz not uttering the word “endorse” is akin to taking a political suicide pill, and somehow asking Trump supporters to support candidates that protect freedom and the Constitution is a bad thing. I have seen the laughable claims that Cruz violated the “pledge”, which Trump tossed out a while ago, and that he should just forgive and forget because it’s politics, but you’re the first to claim he went there to undermine Trump.

    Sean (221079)

  74. yes yes poor butthurt snowflake Ted showed everyone he does not know how to put the country first

    it’s all about his feewings

    happyfeet

    Did you watch the speech? Honest answer please. It was a really positive speech about the country. He urged Republicans to vote. He criticized the democrats.

    Why are you Trump guys mad about it? Can you please quote the section that has upset you so much?

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  75. Dustin, here’s the result of Trump’s “stunning incompetence”: Trump 1725 delegates; Cruz 475 delegates.

    Boris (bc52ec)

  76. Dustin, here’s the result of Trump’s “stunning incompetence”: Trump 1725 delegates; Cruz 475 delegates.

    And there was much rejoicing.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  77. Trump: Your wife is an ugly crazy woman, and your father murdered the president. Now it’s your turn to say something nice about me.

    Cruz [to America]: Vote your conscience.

    Trump: Ungrateful traitor!

    Beldar (fa637a)

  78. Trump was given plenty to work with to unify the party,
    and he blew it up instead
    and made it harder for the
    historically
    huge number of people who voted against him to vote for him after all.

    MD in Philly

    +1

    Cruz was a class act last night, and he (and by extension his supporters) were booed, apparently because that’s what the Trump campaign wanted. Trump took to twitter to bash Cruz some more.

    Trump is the leader of the GOP. It’s his party. It’s up to him to unify. He just can’t be the bigger man, though. Blame everyone else, but those who gave Trump this task were foolish.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  79. i watched part of the speech he’s really not a national political figure anymore so I can’t give him a whole lot of my time and attention

    he’s just not a very gracious person

    we knew he was charmless already but this was just tacky and weird

    what harvardtrash ted attempted to do was to problematize the question of whether we should do stinkypig all up America’s butt

    and sorry but he ended up looking ridiculous

    everyone knows stinkypig is no good

    there’s no way to problematize it

    as Teddy-pie has now learned much to his chagrin poor man

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  80. “Because he is a great man at the right time.”
    Denver Guy (21d3a4) — 7/21/2016 @ 8:27 am

    P.T. Barnum, paging P.T. Barnum … P.T. Barnum to the White Courtesy Phone …

    SPQR (a3a747)

  81. The Dana who noticed (f6a568) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:23 am

    Mrs Trump posing in front of an American flag. Thing is, it’s a 48 star American flag!

    That huge flag might date from the World War II era. She looks younger, too so the picture probably doesn’t date from later than 1995, and might have been taken before 1990. Maybe that’s all that was available in those days in northwestern Yugoslavia, and people in Communist Yugoslavia, or even in Milan, Italy in the early to mid 1990s, might not have been aware of the difference. .

    How many times does anyone get a chance to closely inspect an American flag in Italy?

    How many people would be aware that the design of the flag had changed twice, in 1959, and in 1960?

    In the 1960’s you might have known about the increase in the number of states and that that would change the flag. By the late 1980s, people would have forgotten, and someone like Melania Knauss, born in 1969, probably never even knew that. She probably didn’t even know about the rules for the flag, or the number of states.

    In the United States a U.S. flag that anyone or any organization had in 1959 might have been changed no later than the mid-1960s, but this would not have happened in Paris, France, or in Milan, Italy, and still less, in Yugoslavia. They might have stopped displaying the old flag, but nobody would have gotten a new one.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  82. Trump: Your wife is an ugly crazy woman, and your father murdered the president. Now it’s your turn to say something nice about me.

    Don’t forget Goldman Sach’s executive, “lifting people out of poverty,” through investment banking of wealthy people’s assets.

    Anyway, man of principle lied, and not just about this, in relation to Goldman Sachs, even if his wife didn’t.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  83. DCSCA is an Obama supporter, commenting on a conservative blog, telling us conservatives have to give up principles in favor of personality. The very essence of a concern troll.

    Denver, you are just a trumpite, getting your panties in a twist – and ignoring every specific point I make to support my introduction and conclusion.

    pfft.

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  84. … what harvardtrash ted attempted to do was to problematize the question of whether we should do stinkypig all up America’s butt …

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:08 am

    Care to actually quote the part of his speech that did that? Or are you just going to continue uttering nonsense because you never liked Cruz?

    Sean (221079)

  85. Anyway, man of principle lied, and not just about this, in relation to Goldman Sachs, even if his wife didn’t.
    Denver Guy (21d3a4) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:10 am

    The howlers just say whatever they’re told, huh?

    Eric in Hollywood (6e8226)

  86. Dustin, here’s the result of Trump’s “stunning incompetence”: Trump 1725 delegates; Cruz 475 delegates.

    Boris

    Yeah, Trump won those delegates. Thanks to that rule that they can’t vote their conscience.

    Remember how Cruz was pretty nice to Trump before Trump started bashing Cruz’s dad and wife? That was because Cruz understood he would have to unify the party to beat Hillary.

    You seem to be mostly interested in bashing Cruz supporters. Mathematically, you need the vast majority of Cruz supporters to join your cause or you will lose to Hillary.

    You seem to be on Trump’s team. Why are you screwing this up? Because ego.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  87. Anyway, man of principle lied, and not just about this, in relation to Goldman Sachs, even if his wife didn’t.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:10 am

    Name the lies.

    Sean (221079)

  88. but you’re the first to claim he went there to undermine Trump.

    Sean (221079) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:00 am

    What? Why don’t you try reading the links at #11, 52 and 55?

    Gerald A (945582)

  89. I’m not mad, Dustin. I thought the first 18 minutes of the speech were amazing. It was the brilliant high-brow version of a Trump speech, in fact. He hit all of Trump’s major points and did it in a highbrow way that all the highbrow people (including me) have been wanting to hear. And that’s why he had the crowd eating out of the palm of his hand.

    And it so seemed that he was going to say the magic words ‘I endorse Donald Trump’, maybe say them a few times in case the press didn’t get it. That he was going to be unequivocably clear, that he was going to be the bigger man, that he was going to be the peacemaker, that he was going to be the guy who pulled the fractious party together, that this speech was on every damn channel and no one could get away from it.

    And he tossed that unity on the floor. And now everyone normal (I’m not normal) is going to forget the first great 18 minutes and just remember getting booed at the end.

    I could do a long post about professional wrestling and performances in general, but when you perform, you are playing the audience. You react to them. If you stick to prepared remarks you are in a straightjacket. Cruz needed to read that audience and he did not. Very similar to the way he tried to logically argue with a Trump-crowd that was working with emotion.

    Emotion is always first; reason follows afterwards. Rhetoric versus dialectic.

    Ingot (e5bf64)

  90. Dr. Shatterhand (#7):

    Trump is the nominee, everything to the negative that has happened this week has been either the typical “mis-steps” by his campaign, which lets be honest, have not really had much impact over the last 13 months, other than maybe delay him slightly in locking the nomination up, or deliberate attempts to embarrass the campaign.

    I disagree. Trump is by far the least successful GOP nominee in the history of the party to this point. No one in the history of the GOP has so badly fractured the party, nor left its convention having widened the gaps rather than closed them. Compared even to Ford in 1976, Trump is going to stagger out of this convention in shame and controversy, with the party more badly split than ever.

    The convention was his chance to change course. The convention was his chance to at least try to be a uniter, instead of a coarse, boorish, hateful divider. But Trump is going to be Trump, no matter what, and he’s always going to be the assh*le he’s shown us throughout this campaign. And he’s always going to be this stupid and self-destructive.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  91. What? Why don’t you try reading the links at #11, 52 and 55?

    Gerald A (945582)

    Gerald, Sean has your number. You’re really mad at Cruz for no reason. Cruz wasn’t hard on Trump at all in his speech (did you even watch it?). He encouraged Republicans to vote, and he put forward a positive vision. You keep talking about how Cruz is toast in 2020, which is asinine. A whole lot is going to happen between now and then, including Hillary stomping on Trump in November.

    I’m still waiting for your response on Trump and judges and amnesty and guns. I provided quotes and links and everything in response to your rant, and you got real quiet about the subject. I nope you’re not one of those commenters that can’t admit when they are mistaken.

    BTW, did you really support Cruz?

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  92. Or are you just going to continue uttering nonsense because you never liked Cruz?

    you make me sound like a bad person

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  93. Gerald A (945582) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:48 am

    It seems inescapable to most everyone that it was a calculation about 2020.

    And if it was a calculation, he badly miscalculated.

    I’m still inclined to think there’s a secret plan in the works to make a coup and have the Texas Republican Party put some other name on the ballot as the Republican nominee. None of this makes any sense if there isn’t.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  94. Bravo for Ted. Not looking forward to a Trump victory and his Goldman Sacks money guy running the Treasury. Don’t want a Hillary victory either. Would prefer a viable third party candidate.

    Ghost Rider (577e96)

  95. Ingot,

    Great comment and I understand what you’re saying. At the end, Cruz called for everyone to vote the way they think is right. He did not say ‘Vote Trump’.

    Emotion is always first; reason follows afterwards.

    I suppose Cruz was supposed to say something he didn’t think was true, that Trump deserves support. But it’s up to Trump to be the man who deserves support. The sole reason Cruz would support trump is that (R). After Trump’s insane attacks on Cruz’s father and wife, attacks Trump should have apologized for publicly, how could Cruz outright endorse that (R)?

    Cruz would have been such a poor son and husband to put career ahead of family like that. Instead, he offered a nice speech that joined his message with the message many Trump fans believe in, but did not endorse anyone, and told folks to do what they think is right.

    I think that was classy of Cruz, but you capture the other point of view really nicely.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  96. What? Why don’t you try reading the links at #11, 52 and 55?

    Gerald A (945582) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:13 am

    I’m not good at reading between imaginary lines and seeing veiled implied threats unlike Mr Johnson at PowerLine, who appears to be an expert on the matter. However, I still fail to see where he’s suggesting that Cruz specifically went to Cleveland to undermine Trump’s Presidential bid?

    Here’s a nice line from that piece your quoted:

    “Today Cruz says he didn’t say a single negative word about Donald Trump. One would have to be a fool, however, to miss the implications. His speech was pregnant with them, which isn’t to say that any of them are wrong.”

    Like I said, Mr. Johnson is a mind reader. Certainly a ringing endorsement of why Cruz is a bad guy. He never said anything bad, pretty much was right, but darn him for his dog whistles and cloak and dagger coded statements. I swear, I’m going to buy stock in tin foil next week.

    Sean (221079)

  97. you make me sound like a bad person

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:22 am

    😉

    Sean (221079)

  98. Get Off My Cloud Site

    I rail on the record for the ninety-ninth time at you spuds
    And I sit at work looking out the window
    Imagining successful prosecution of the cruds
    Then in flies a post from a guy supportin’ Trump
    Who says, I’ll lose it all if I have Ted Cruz’s back
    Gotta go world-class, ya can’t be supportin’ no Texas hack.”
    I says, Hey! You! Get offa my site
    Hey! You! Get offa my site
    Hey! You! Get offa my site
    Don’t hang around, go fly a kite
    It’s my site, baby

    The telephone is ringing
    I say, “Hi, it’s me. Who is there on the line?”
    A voice says, “Hi, hello, how are you?”
    Well, I guess I’m doin’ fine
    He says, “It’s past time now, wake up
    ain’t you tired of reppin’ for lost cause Cruz?”
    Just ’cause you feel so strong
    Do you have to support that criminal cooz?”

    I says, Hey! You! Get offa my site
    Hey! You! Get offa my site
    Hey! You! Get offa my site
    Don’t hang around, go fly a kite
    It’s my site, baby

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  99. @ Sean (#42): I concur in your comment entirely and associate myself with your remarks.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  100. It is astonishing that Trump’s character has been so clearly demonstrated in the events of this campaign. One would think he would deviate from his self-destructive course. Over and over he’s been given the chance to back away from the braying bully. But he hasn’t. He is what he is. One might hope that what we’ve seen is an act, something to stir the mob, but sadly there’s nothing behind the facade.

    The response of the GOPe is also remarkable. They lacked backbone as legislators, and now confronted with a situation that calls for discretion and prudence, they abandon all pretense and leap on the band wagon hoping to crush Cruz.

    The most unpleasant reality is that Trump and the GOPe are giants compared to the Democrats. What a mess.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe)

  101. BTW, did you really support Cruz?

    Dustin

    Before your head explodes, Gerald, this was a joke. I recall something about you considering voting Rubio to stop Trump, but you liked Cruz more.

    But suddenly now you’re wearing your Cruz T-Shirt like a talisman of protection from the claim you’re a hack. You knew what Trump was before he was the nominee. He’s still the same guy now.

    There are many republicans who say Trump sucks, Hillary sucks, and they have to pick one. That is an intellectually honest position. And it’s why Trump will obviously lose, even if he gets 2/3rds of those people. We don’t need to fight about it. Hillary is the next president, thanks to Trump and his fevered fans. We need to start talking about the future.

    Cruz’s speech was indeed a step in that direction. Though what would Cruz have to work with in 2020? The democrats will win so many legislative seats thanks to Trump. More in 2018. Judges. Admin law. We’re headed for some tough times, and I don’t see a realistic solution. I disagree with Cruz on that.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  102. Yeah, those are the rules, Dustin. I guess Cruz would’ve won if the rules had been changed so that candidates whose names start with “C” had their delegate count multiplied by 5. But they weren’t.

    Boris (bc52ec)

  103. I would say to any Republican officeholder, if Trump had said the things about your wife and father that Trump said about Cruz’s wife and father, and you will tell me that you nonetheless would have stood up on a public stage and endorsed Trump, then you should not be holding public office. And if Cruz would have endorsed, other than the way he did, I would have been through with him for future consideration.

    It is ONLY because he gave the speech he gave the way he gave it that I would consider him in 2020 after Hillary’s first term.

    tabman (23a43b)

  104. Sean (221079) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:00 am

    …it seems conscience is now considered a dog-whistle,

    Is everybody quoting me, or is that particular phrase [dog whistle] something you read only at Patterico? I don’t mind the plagiarism, if there is any, just so long as nothing gets falsely attributed to me. Otherwise, feel free to use.

    Yesterday, Colonel Haiku said Ted Cruz did not stab Donald Trump in the back, and I said he did, with the words “vote your conscience” and it seems the New York Post agrees with me:

    http://nypost.com/2016/07/20/ted-cruz-stops-short-of-endorsing-donald-trump/

    The Republican convention erupted in fury Wed­nesday night when a defiant Ted Cruz refused to endorse Donald Trump and instead urged people to “vote their conscience.”

    Members of the New York delegation began furiously chanting, “Endorse!” and “We want Trump!” even before Cruz finished, when it became apparent he was stabbing the GOP nominee in the back to position himself for a potential 2020 White House run.

    Cruz paused, smiled and responded snidely, “I appreciate the enthusiasm of the New York delegation.”

    It’s not conscience that’s a dog whistle. It’s the words “vote your conscience,” that’s a dog whistle; an echo of the Perot campaign:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8C-ERa4jcY

    “Vote your conscience”

    is the antithesis of:

    “Vote for the lesser of the two evils”

    While Trump had the full text of the speech, and knew that Ted Cruz would not give an outright enddorsement, I don’t think his censors caught the full meaning of that, which is something like “Vote Libertarian!” if the Libertarian candidate is acceptable to you.

    Of course, Donald Trump would at least want such people not to vote for Hillary Clinton so it would be useful for him to have Ted Cruz give such a speech, so maybe they did understand. It would be very unlikely for anyone inclined to listen to Ted Cruz to think that Hillary Clinton could be trusted “to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution,” so “Vote your conscience”
    is better for him than “Vote for the lesser of the two evils” and Ted Cruz even gave Donald Trump a rather low bar to clear.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  105. @ “the Dana who …”: Thanks for your comment (#44) about the 48-star flag pictured with Mrs. Trump. That’s certainly curious. I completely disagree with you, though, about whether Sen. Cruz peed on the carpet (#33), and I’m disappointed if you’ve gone over to the view that Republicans owe Trump some sort of personal loyalty or approval because he’s the party’s nominee. I thought you’d be the Dana Who Realized There’s More to the GOP Than Its Presidential Nominee.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  106. Yeah, those are the rules, Dustin. I guess Cruz would’ve won if the rules had been changed so that candidates whose names start with “C” had their delegate count multiplied by 5. But they weren’t.

    Boris

    Those rules aren’t constitutional, according to, you know, judges and the law and stuff.

    Millions of democrats poured into this primary to make sure Trump was the nominee. Hillary smiles whenever his name is mentioned. Trump gave Hillary cash and even met with her before running in this primary. The media gave empty Trump podiums and Trump’s airplane more free publicity than any of the other 17 candidates. Of course Trump won under these conditions.

    This is why the system needs to be changed, somehow, to avoid more hostile takeovers from democrats.

    You seem to think this is about spiking the football. You haven’t won yet. I won’t be voting for Trump in November. I will listen to Sean and vote for a lot of Republicans in downticket races. I want to vote for Hillary real bad when I see you guys sneer about taking over the GOP… I also know this Hillary stinks. It’s interesting how hard you fight to make sure I vote for Hillary, though. But we both know it won’t be close. My vote is just a protest of either of two terrible candidates.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  107. Is everybody quoting me, or is that particular phrase [dog whistle] something you read only at Patterico? I don’t mind the plagiarism, if there is any, just so long as nothing gets falsely attributed to me. Otherwise, feel free to use…

    It’s not conscience that’s a dog whistle. It’s the words “vote your conscience,” that’s a dog whistle…

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:41 am

    Actually there are plenty of pundits on the alt-right using the term dog whistle today in regards to Cruz’s statements. If I didn’t know better I’d think we were seeing one of those coordinated talking points the left likes to use all the time.

    Sean (221079)

  108. Would the Trumphillic have preferred:

    “Vote against your conscience; vote Trump!”

    ThOR (c9324e)

  109. Sean

    [according to right and alt-right blogs] Cruz not uttering the word “endorse” is akin to taking a political suicide pill,

    That was Charles Krauthammer.

    and somehow asking Trump supporters to support candidates that protect freedom and the Constitution is a bad thing.

    Not “Trump supporters” but Republicans or Cruz supporters, and it could be a half bad thing for Trump if they don’t trust him to do that. Half bad, because he’s also asking them not to vote for Hillary Clinton, as many Texas and other Republicans are considering doing per DRJ and others.

    This morning, in a visit to Texas delegation, Ted Cruz made clear he was not voting for Hillary Clinton, so his meaning is clear. “Vote your conscience” means don’t vote for Hillary, even if you don’t can’t abide a vote for Trump.

    Trump maybe didn’t get what he liked but it still was better for him than Ted Cruz saying nothing. Hillary’s lead always shrinks in the polls when the name of third party candidates are added.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  110. One amusing thing my husband pointed out is that in the Trump-Pence ticket, the usual good cop bad cop roles are reversed.

    Usually it’s the President who is calm, measured, presidential; and the Vice President who acts as the attack dog, who issues the negative statements against the enemy Presidential candidate. It’s done this way so that the Presidential candidate doesn’t have any stigma of negativism about him.

    But in this case, Trump is the bad cop, and Pence is the good cop. Trump grabs someone by the shirt collar, throws them around, splashes water in their face, tweets pictures of their wife; and then Pence comes in, holds him back, soothes the crowd, moderates the message. And says like a good cop says, “You know, I can’t hold him back any longer! You better do what he says and get on the train!”

    Ingot (e5bf64)

  111. Actually there are plenty of pundits on the alt-right using the term dog whistle today in regards to Cruz’s statements.

    Left uses that expression all the time as well to imply racism.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  112. Mr. Trump is so good everyone should vote for him!

    Stinkypig must be stopped even in spite of Ted Cruz – for freedom, for prosperity, for America.

    I’m so excited to be coming to the end of the food stamp/stinkypig era but we can’t do it without your help!

    Please everyone do what you can in spite of Ted Cruz to save America thank you for listening

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  113. And you know what? If Trump wins AND governs as the kind of second-coming-of-Reagan that people are hoping for (and that I’m pretty sure won’t happen), then all of us win, because we actually have a president that cares about the Constitution. Which is precisely what Cruz says he cares about the most. So if you take Cruz at his word (and I do), then he’ll be as happy as I’ll be if Trump turns out to be a good, conservative president.

    Mark my words: if Trump turns out to be another Reagan, I will be VERY happy to admit publicly that I was wrong about him, and that he was the complete opposite of a disaster. I would really LIKE to be wrong, here.

    Robin Munn (328f66) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:05 am

    While others were comparing him to Lincoln and FDR and even Reagan, I said eight years ago at this space I would be delighted to be proven wrong about Obama the way I was proven wrong about The Gipper. But, sadly, I was right: The secretive, sneaky, race-baiting, socialist-bred, domestic terrorist-loving, PLO-suckup that I thought he was before he won the White House is who he proved himself to be, many times over.

    I find NO reason whatsoever to believe that an egomaniacal, petulant, slimy grifter will suddenly transform into something completely different once he places his hand on the Bible and takes the oath.

    L.N. Smithee (b84cf6)

  114. @62,@68, @84:

    Those of us who’ve lived and worked in New York- especially in the go-go 80’s– are familiar with the Trump Treatment– long before the TV show hit the airwaves. The late Merv Griffin learned it the hard way. Now Ted Cruz has as well. But it’s likely still new to most of America.

    Here’s an anecdote. Inside baseball stuff, but somewhat revealing on how Trump operated.

    Back in the early 80’s, when the three martini lunch was still deductible, Trump had a lot of projects and properties in work around Manhattan, Connecticut, Florida, North Jersey and Atlantic City. And he funneled a lot of advertising, PR, promotion and marketing dollars for them through various New York based ad agencies. They were still a clubby group then. Trump was a marquee name to have on your client roster in the metropolitan region and the top four-star shops welcomed his business. If you caught the TV series ‘Mad Men,’ one of the last vestiges left over from that era was still in place then– the 17.65% commission four-star agencies charged top drawer clients for creative, account and media buying services. It was pretty much on the QT, too. Nobody talked much about it. CBS paid it. Panasonic paid it. It was just the way the business was ‘done’ and deep-pocketed firms didn’t squawk. Nobody back then ever thought of trying to negotiate it because everybody paid it and with some good accounting, it could be a deduction.

    Now you likely are quite aware of how adept Trump is at self-promotion and marketing. But Trump has always cast a suspicious eye toward the cost/benefit of advertising in general. It’s a different animal from promotion and sometimes you can still hear that skepticism surface when he is campaigning.

    Trump had so much business out to shops back then and was ramping up the AC work as well that he balked at the standard commission fees because he wasn’t convinced the cost/benefit was paying off in advertising. So why pay that rate? What am I getting for it? I’ll negotiate a lower fee. So he made it known to shops he wouldn’t pay the 17.65% commission. 12%– maybe 14%. He’d negotiate.

    Well, nobody at the four star top shops wanted that buzz out in the industry; that all of a sudden, their gravy train fee structure could be “negotiated.” If Trump got to negotiate it, they’d all want it. So the top shops stood firm, believing the shops down the food chain in the ‘club’ would stand with them. However, up and coming shops, hungry for business and wanting to add a marquee name to draw in even more business, broke ranks and began negotiating with The Donald. And Trump threw business their way. The top shops were blind-sided. And within the ad biz circles at that time, Trump is ‘credited’ or ‘blamed’ for breaking the back of the fee structure along Madison Avenue. Today, negotiating the fee is routine. It wasn’t then. One one hand, he cost a lot of people their jobs at the big shops. But on the other hand, he created opportunities for new jobs at smaller shops. So ask yourself what a President Trump might do if the Navy says it needs for 15 new subs that cost $8 billion a piece. Negotiate? Pay the freight? Or tell them to make do?

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  115. But in this case, Trump is the bad cop, and Pence is the good cop. Trump grabs someone by the shirt collar, throws them around, splashes water in their face, tweets pictures of their wife; and then Pence comes in, holds him back, soothes the crowd, moderates the message. And says like a good cop says, “You know, I can’t hold him back any longer! You better do what he says and get on the train!”

    Ingot

    Pence is a terrific VP choice and probably a great 2020 contender now. In contrast to Trump he is textbook presidential. Pence may be able to get many Trump voters in 2020, but he’s not actually crazy or a democrat like Trump.

    I have to give Trump credit for this decision. At the end of the day Trump gets credit for everything his campaign does and doesn’t do.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  116. So your complaint is that Trump is popular with Democrats as well as Republicans, and what we really need is someone completely unpalatable to Dems, like Cruz?

    BTW I don’t know where you get the idea that I’m trying to rub it in. I’ve never said a single disparaging thing to any Cruz supporter on this site, unlike many of the commences here do to Trump supporters, starting with the increasingly deranged Mr. Patterico himself.

    Boris (bc52ec)

  117. What tabman said

    One given reason for liking Trump was that he said what was on his mind and didn’t let people intimidate him,
    That is what Cruz did,
    He wasn’t going to make peace with someone maligning his wife and father and unrepentant about it,
    and he wasn’t going to let people booing intimidate him.

    And we wonder why we don’t get more good people running for office.

    Well, in God’s Kingdom, it is the resurrection that matters, perhaps the rumors of Cruz’ political demise are premature.

    MD in Philly (f00ab0)

  118. Trump maybe didn’t get what he liked but it still was better for him than Ted Cruz saying nothing.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:50 am

    That’s an excellent, and honest assessment of last night. Considering Trump has never taken a step towards Cruz, Cruz took as much of a step towards Trump as he could. I applaud him for that, when the easiest path would have been not to show up, or give in to the cries for him to abandon his principles and fully endorse Trump. As much as Trump fans want to make Cruz out to be a classless jerk they fail to see what Cruz did last night was an attempt to unite much of the disaffected voters to support those running not named Trump. At the same time he made an impassioned argument for continuing the push of conservatism within the party. If Trump fans love an anti-establishment guy, Cruz certainly stands alone in that role after last night.

    Sean (221079)

  119. Sean (221079) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:46 am

    Actually there are plenty of pundits on the alt-right using the term dog whistle today in regards to Cruz’s statements. If I didn’t know better I’d think we were seeing one of those coordinated talking points the left likes to use all the time.

    Maybe a number of people had the same idea at the same time. That’s how a new coinage takes life.

    “Dog whistle” is a common talking point on the left, used where it doesn’t apply, but here is a case where the true meaning of the phrase actually applies, so the temptation is pretty strong to use that phrase.

    The Daily News caught the meaning, at least on the front page (or caught some idea of it, and maybe then distorted its meaning)

    In white letters, bullet dots in red:

    CIVIL WAR!

    o Cruz to GOPers: Vote for anyone you want! [no, not quite]

    o Trumpkins boo defiant non-endorsement

    o Ted’s wife escorted away from angry mob

    The Daily News, I think, wants to preserve its ability to endorse some Republicans in the future, as long as it’s not Ted Cruz, whom they don’t like either, so they are not going against the Republican Party so much as going against Donald Trump. And they are pro-Clinton, but don’t seem to be so much behind any other Democrat.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  120. Yeah, Trump won those delegates. Thanks to that rule that they can’t vote their conscience.

    Remember how Cruz was pretty nice to Trump before Trump started bashing Cruz’s dad and wife? That was because Cruz understood he would have to unify the party to beat Hillary.

    You seem to be mostly interested in bashing Cruz supporters. Mathematically, you need the vast majority of Cruz supporters to join your cause or you will lose to Hillary.

    You seem to be on Trump’s team. Why are you screwing this up? Because ego.
    Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:12 am

    72.Trump was given plenty to work with to unify the party,
    and he blew it up instead
    and made it harder for the
    historically
    huge number of people who voted against him to vote for him after all.
    MD in Philly (f00ab0) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:58 am

    The Trumpkins keep pissing in the pool and limiting his appeal to other voters, mainly because they don’t know where else to go. I despise Hillary and recognize she’s much worse than Donald, but the Trump supporters just keep on reminding me of what I don’t like about him.

    Politics isn’t a zero-sum game. There’s a winner and a loser, but after the vote you need to rally support whether among the greater party or greater country. Trump and his supporters keep acting like they can do an in-your-face sack dance because it’s all over. It isn’t. There’s another election, and you need more votes. Then someone has to govern, and you need support for that. All they do instead is set grudges and act surprised. Scorched earth tactics will do that.

    And yeah, DCSCA is a classic concern troll. He manages to roast his “preferred” candidate with almost every post.

    Advo (322ad6)

  121. No, my complaint is that Trump had more votes against him than for him when there was a choice.
    If he was not stupid or not arrogant or both
    he would realize that maybe he should try harder to attract the 60%+ that did not vote for him in many states.

    Rather than going out of his way to insult them

    He said he would win without the support of conservatives,
    so don’t blame conservatives if he doesn’t win.

    MD in Philly (f00ab0)

  122. I had tossed out an idea earlier and just want to know (use it is a Hail Mary idea) if anyone besides me thinks it is viable.

    Assumption 1: If Hillary wins the US is lost (debt, national security, immigration, voter fraud, and filling SCOTUS with rabid Leftists). So the final call needs to be #neverHillary

    Assumption 2: A large number of people are not happy with the final GOP pick. Yes, I too can think of others that I wish were there instead of Trump and I voted for Cruz in the primary but pouting and doing something which ensures Hillary as POTUS to me is out of the question.

    Idea: Get down to brass tacks and give everyone a pass on voting Never Hillary (a vote which is not a protest, write in, or etc but for a candidate to beat her even if that means it is Trump). All non Trump people who vote for Trump have full rights to say “I told you so” to anyone who actually supported Trump. Then start planning for 2020. Also, if Trump turns out to be as bad as the never Trump people say then everyone work to get him impeached after he is POTUS. He has few friends on either side of the aisle so it should not be hard to impeach him even for sneezing wrong and then the VP is POTUS. If Hillary wins the US is toast and impeaching her would only give us her leftist VP so still lose SCOTUS and immigration plus the Democrats would fight like mad to keep their first woman president from being impeached.

    Ideas/Thoughts welcome as I am sick to death of hearing all the Never trump Never trump without any plan to keep Hillary from being POTUS and killing the US. This idea at least gives the US a chance.

    Summerwarmth (4123cb)

  123. @121. See 115.

    Sooner or later you’ll realize that we’re in an era when Americans don’t want to be bothered about governing; they wish to be entertained. And we all know which candidate is by far the most ‘entertaining,’ don’t we.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  124. Every argument based on “dog whistles” is illegitimate and offensive. When you insist that you have the right to overrule others in a discussion because you insist that you know their mental status better than they do, you’re accusing them of lying at the most basic level, and you’re not engaged in a discussion. You’re making an attack.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  125. You might be right; but it’s not a legitimate or productive form of discussion.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  126. @ DCSCA (#124): Actually, most Americans want to be freed from lying weasels who argue in bad faith for the express purpose of making other people angry.

    But it’s funny to see some of the Trumpkin shills here, in their confusion, adopting you as their spokesperson.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  127. I’ve never said a single disparaging thing to any Cruz supporter on this site, unlike many of the commences here do to Trump supporters, starting with the increasingly deranged Mr. Patterico himself.

    Boris

    Yes indeed, you never disparage anyone like that deranged nutjob.

    Trump supporter, you’re not very self aware.

    your complaint is that Trump is popular with Democrats as well as Republicans

    No. Trump is not popular with the millions of democrats who voted for him to make sure Hillary wins in November. I don’t think you’ve figured out what was going on.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  128. Boris, you & Mrs. Trump should go back to trying to catch moose and squirrel.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  129. @127. See 48 & 115.

    “Actually, most Americans want to be freed from lying weasels who argue in bad faith for the express purpose of making other people angry.”

    And they have been. Mr. Cruz has been sent packing. Actually.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  130. Cruz emailed me for money for his 2018 campaign. Whoever is running against him in the republican primary will get a check.

    mg (31009b)

  131. Like Trump, I kinda admire folks like Stalin & Putin, and wonder why we can’t do some righteous purging here, too.

    I would start with Happy Feet, who I would purge because of my prejudice against the illiterate. Happy Feet is like David Letterman, who used to “ironically” say dumb things, under the supposed premise that he was actually sophisticated. But it quickly became apparent that Letterman was an idiot.

    Similarly, Happy Feet would have us believe that behind his sub-literate and ungrammatical scrawlings focusing on excretory matters, there’s some real intelligence lurking.

    But there isn’t.

    Purge.

    Brian (b7c63e)

  132. thank you Brian.

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  133. 125. Beldar (fa637a) — 7/21/2016 @ 11:10 am

    Every argument based on “dog whistles” is illegitimate and offensive. When you insist that you have the right to overrule others in a discussion because you insist that you know their mental status better than they do, you’re accusing them of lying at the most basic level, and you’re not engaged in a discussion. You’re making an attack.

    The difference between a true “dog whistle” and an accusation that what someone said was a “dog whistle” is that it when it a false accusation, it is not the target audience of the dog whistle that claims to hear it, or neutral people, but only people who claim that what somebody really meant is something very uncomplimentary. Like Dustin says, it’s been used to imply that something said was an appeal to racism.

    But genuine “dog whistles” can exist too – that is, when something is not understood by one group of people, who have to be gotten past, but the coded language is understood by others. just because some people like and claim something is a code for something else, doesn’t mean actual cided langiage cannot exist.

    In China, the date of May 35 might be called a dog whistle, not heard by younger people censoring personal ads because for a generation the Communist Party suppressed all discussion of the Tiananmen Square massacre of June 4, 1989. [May 35 = June 4] A true “dog whistle” is unmistakeable, and not deniable or denied.

    “Vote your conscience” can only mean vote third party, assuming you find the third party candidate better than either of the major two party candidates, or otherwise there’s no point in mentioning it.

    “Vote your conscience” is what Ross Perot said:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8C-ERa4jcY

    Vote third party is a meaning the Trump campaign could have missed, but maybe actually in fact didn’t, but wanted to make sure it was booed anyway.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  134. Cruz emailed me for money for his 2018 campaign. Whoever is running against him in the republican primary will get a check.

    mg

    Really? He hasn’t emailed me. He’s one of the very few politicians I’ve even given money to!

    I met one of his staff at a chamber of commerce meeting in Leander. Real sharp lady. I’ve met many many Legislative Assistants and the like over the years (for a brief time I even did that sort of work) and they usually came across as career strivers. Immersed in the game of politics, with a goal of cashing in as a lobbyist. Cruz’s employee instead was hopeful that conservative government can save our future. There’s real staying power in those beliefs.

    I’m sorry to see so much anger at Cruz, particularly from conservatives who are resigned to Trump for now. It’s one thing to make a mistake, and another to burn a bridge. Our nation is running out of second chances, and 2016 is already done as far as I can tell.

    Cruz will be a Senator as long as he wishes to be. He’s built his base the right way, and he doesn’t make promises he can’t keep. I actually agree with Gerald that his chances of becoming president are not great. I say that after watching our primary process for many years… it’s an absolute disgrace. The GOP can do better than this, but they don’t want to.

    Beldar refuses to give up on the GOP… that’s really the only place where I think I depart from his views. I think the nearly impossible task of building a new party, or the union being reorganized into two countries, are actually more likely to work than the GOP ever being freed from the types of folks who dominate it.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  135. * Just because some people like to claim something is a code for something else, doesn’t mean actual coded language cannot exist in the right circumstances.

    And since Ted Cruz’s speech had to be approved by Donald Trump’s campaign, it is plausible that he had a motive to say things in a coded way, and that he said it this way to get it past the “censor.”

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  136. To Trump supporters:

    1) What was wrong with the speech?

    2) Do you believe people shouldn’t vote according to their conscience in a private ballot?

    3) Should minorities feel the same way about their vote?

    4) Why should anyone “bend the knee” to a politician? Are they royalty?

    5) Do you support constitutional principles?

    6) Is voting for your team all that matters?

    7) How did you feel about the GoPe and Trump ignoring the will of the delegates to allow rule changes such as closing primaries (eliminating the leftist vote) in future election cycles? Why would they oppose that?

    njrob (e85ec3)

  137. Love Trump Train

    People all over the world (everybody)
    Join hands (join)
    Start a Trump Train, Trump Train
    People all over the world (all the world, now)
    Join hands (slow ride)
    Start a Trump Train (slow ride), Trump Train
    The next stop that we make will be soon
    Tell all the #NeverTrumpers and Clinton too
    Don’t you know that it’s time to get on board
    And let this train keep on riding, riding on through
    Well, well
    People all over the world (he don’t need yo’ money)
    Join hands (come on)
    Start a Trump Train, Trump Train (don’t need no paid staff, come on)
    People all over the world (Hop on, ride this train)
    Hop on (Ride this train, y’all)
    Start a Trump Train (Come on, train), Trump Train

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  138. Sammy,

    resorting to carrying Trump’s water so your girl Hillary can get elected. Congrats.

    Are you here because you’ve moved on from making excuses for BLM and murdering cops?

    njrob (e85ec3)

  139. 1. Cruz left off the punch line.
    2. People should vote to save the country.
    3. Minorities should vote to save the country.
    4. A hearty handshake is acceptable. We are Americans.
    5. Yes.
    6. No.
    7. They have plenty of time to do so in the next 2-4 years.

    Ingot (e5bf64)

  140. Free all the chilluns! Let them be happy Democrats!

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  141. mg: Cruz will be unopposed in the 2018 GOP primary, or if he has opponents (e.g., bitter Trumpkins), they’ll be lost in the statistical noise. Right now Ted Cruz is the most popular man in the State of Texas. So throw away your money if you want — but you’ll probably have to throw it at Democrats or third-party candidates. Wendy Davis is still probably accepting contributions.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  142. You went there, Beldar. Ees no good!

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  143. resorting to carrying Trump’s water so your girl Hillary can get elected. Congrats.

    Well, thwart him by voting for Trump.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  144. Mr. Finkleman, not everything that is subtle is a “dog whistle.”

    I’m not denying that many politicians frequently use signals rather than overt language, and that they do so to avoid or minimize blowback.

    I’m saying that any time you’re in a discussion with someone and you say to them, “What you just said is a ‘dog-whistle’ coded message, intended to mean ____,” you’re asserting that you have a superior ability to understand the heart and mind of the speaker than the speaker himself has.

    There were no “dog whistles” in what Cruz said last night, but yes, there were deliberate subtleties, and one omission in particular — Cruz didn’t specifically reveal his own views as to whether Donald J. Trump (whom he congratulated on winning the nomination as the first order of business in his speech) is, indeed, someone whom voters should trust to defend our liberties and our Constitution.

    The question sort of answers itself. The least provocative thing Cruz could do, though, was to remain silent. That’s not dog-whistling, Mr. Finkelman.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  145. Nailed it. Both Patterico and Cruz.

    David Longfellow (8cba7a)

  146. The esteemed Mr Finkelman wrote:

    Mrs Trump posing in front of an American flag. Thing is, it’s a 48 star American flag!

    That huge flag might date from the World War II era. She looks younger, too so the picture probably doesn’t date from later than 1995, and might have been taken before 1990. Maybe that’s all that was available in those days in northwestern Yugoslavia, and people in Communist Yugoslavia, or even in Milan, Italy in the early to mid 1990s, might not have been aware of the difference. .

    Given that the flag has had fifty stars since 1959 . . . .

    The Dana who checked the date (f6a568)

  147. Cruz emailed me for money for his 2018 campaign. Whoever is running against him in the republican primary will get a check.

    mg (31009b) — 7/21/2016 @ 11:23 am

    Was that the same email where he wrote: “We must make the most of our moment – to fight for freedom, to protect our God-given rights, even of those with whom we don’t agree, so when we are old, and our work is done, we will be able to say, “Freedom matters, and I fought to save it.”

    Funny, but I haven’t seen a 2018 reelection donation email from him yet. And I’m curious how on one hand telling Cruz’s supporters that you’ll back his primary challenger while on the other hand eviscerating them for not supporting Trump is productive and helps promote party unity?

    Sean (221079)

  148. Mr Finkelman drinks the conspiracy theory water! :)

    I’m still inclined to think there’s a secret plan in the works to make a coup and have the Texas Republican Party put some other name on the ballot as the Republican nominee. None of this makes any sense if there isn’t.

    Texas is the biggest trove of electoral votes available for the Republican candidate, and doing something like would guarantee that, unless she just plain drops dead, Hillary Clinton will be elected in November. That’s the best way I know to get a Republican revolt in a Republican state, to throw out Senator Cruz and all of the rest of them.

    The Dana who can't accept the theory (f6a568)

  149. “BOOM! Cornel West: Hillary Presidency ‘Could Lead to World War III.’ ”

    When you’ve lost Cornel West…

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  150. Beldar wrote:

    I completely disagree with you, though, about whether Sen. Cruz peed on the carpet (#33), and I’m disappointed if you’ve gone over to the view that Republicans owe Trump some sort of personal loyalty or approval because he’s the party’s nominee. I thought you’d be the Dana Who Realized There’s More to the GOP Than Its Presidential Nominee.

    I realize that I’ve been away from this site for a while, but I am that Dana. However, this is Donald Trump’s convention, and everybody knows it.

    Had Senator Cruz simply stayed in Texas, the message would have been sent; he didn’t have to pee on the carpet. While we can’t know the future, my guess is that Senator Cruz did himself more harm than good.

    It would be interesting to see Senator Cruz campaigning for down-ticket Republicans, and endorsing Gary Johnson for President. No, I don’t think that he’ll do that.

    The Dana who is planning on voting for Gary Johnson (f6a568)

  151. “BOOM! Cornel West: Hillary Presidency ‘Could Lead to World War III.’ ”

    When you’ve lost Cornel West…

    Colonel Haiku

    She’s terrible.

    Trump is openly discussing how NATO doesn’t mean anything to him and is open to nuking Europe. I know if I were South Korean I would vote for “wrong within normal parameters” over the GOP’s version of Kim Il Sung.

    Patterico captures my views on this so closely I wonder if he’s living in my head. Cruz can’t kiss the ass of the man who is proud of trashing Cruz’s wife and dad. And any bully insisting he must is a piece of work. I’ve met ass kissers like that in every walk of life and I do not respect them.

    Cruz has an easy explanation to offer in 2020 when people ask him about this. And franky, I wonder if Trump had made a public apology to Cruz’s wife and dad if Cruz would have accepted and endorsed. Trump was a total fool in not doing so months ago, unifying the party as he must if he’s serious about beating Hillary.

    The people upset that Hillary will win should direct their frustration at the GOP’s new leader.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  152. Had Senator Cruz simply stayed in Texas, the message would have been sent; he didn’t have to pee on the carpet.

    The convention typically has speeches from the runners up, because they won states and those voters are entitled to a voice. It’s a convention, not a single candidate’s campaign speech. Cruz did the right thing by representing the voices of so many Republicans and conservatives who vote republican.

    The boos didn’t have to happen. That was artificial. If Trump’s people had cheered instead, it would have helped Trump’s chances. That choice wasn’t Cruz’s.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  153. It’s particularly amusing how so many Trump fans insist that if you don’t support Trump, you must agree with Hillary and actually like her. That’s a very dishonest point of view. Even most democrats think Hillary sucks. But the primary process takes power away from the people.

    Sanders v Cruz would have been a legitimate discussion about the way the country should work. Hillary v Trump is an irrelevant discussion of which pack of establishment New Yorkers divy up the spoils of big government.

    We need to take the discussion out one level of abstraction. We need to fix our primaries. Why did Trump fight changing the primary rules so that democrats can’t vote in GOP primaries?

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  154. Well said, Sir.

    Jason Barnhart (c2c4d3)

  155. This:

    We need to take the discussion out one level of abstraction. We need to fix our primaries. Why did Trump fight changing the primary rules so that democrats can’t vote in GOP primaries?

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  156. Mr. Trump is so good

    bring on the prosper!

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  157. America is so close to being great again.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  158. Mr Malynn quoted:

    We need to take the discussion out one level of abstraction. We need to fix our primaries. Why did Trump fight changing the primary rules so that democrats can’t vote in GOP primaries?

    Primary election laws are set by the state government, not the parties.

    Some states do not register voters by party; the prospective voter simply declares in which party primary he wishes to vote when he gets to the polling place. These aren’t all just liberal states; Virginia and Mississippi allow this.

    The facts are plain: as much as I dislike the fact, Donald Trump played by the rules, and won enough delegates to secure the nomination. It’s pretty obvious that a whole bunch of Republicans do like him.

    The Dana who isn't an attorney (f6a568)

  159. I didn’t know this, but Newt Gingrich, who spoke after Ted Cruz, between Eric Trump and Donald Trump introducing Mike Pence….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r3Rump6XCc

    …gave an exegesis of what Ted Cruz said, and said that the only proper way to interpret what Ted Cruz said was not to vote for Hillary Clinton, and that meant to vote for Trump. Maybe Newt Gingrich should be on the Supreme Court.

    http://www.whatthefolly.com/2016/07/21/transcript-newt-gingrichs-speech-at-the-republican-national-convention-part-1/

    Now, I think you misunderstood one paragraph that Ted Cruz, who was a superb orator, said, and I just want tio point it out to you.

    Ted Cruz said you can vote your conscience for anyone who will uphold the Constitution. In this election, there is only one candidate who will uphold the Constitution.

    So, to paraphrase Ted Cruz, if you want to protect the Constitution of the United States, the only possible candidate this fall is the Trump-Pence Republican ticket.

    This was not ad libbed. It was on the teleprompter, although it wasn’t in the text released before the speech was delivered. * Newt Gingrich saw the Ted Cruz speech before. In fact, the Trump campaign obviously saw both speeches before.

    This is starting to look a little like something out of professional wrestling.

    http://www.wwe.com/videos/playlists/donald-trump-greatest-wwe-moments

    —————————–
    * Newt Gingrich speech as prepared:

    http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/national-international/Former-Speaker-Newt-Gingrich-Addresses-RNC-387710001.html

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  160. 143. Belds brought up a valid Money-Where-Mouth-Is response. I dont think W. Davis is what he had in mind, but there’s that police chief from Dallas, the current SA mayor, the pro-enforcement sheriff of Travis County, that wouldnt elicit a gagging reflex from Texas R voters who truly might turn on Cruz were he to survive a “primarying” attempt.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  161. Col. H, I don’t follow your comment at #143, I’m afraid. I respect your views, so I’m curious what you meant.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  162. Dustin wrote:

    Sanders v Cruz would have been a legitimate discussion about the way the country should work. Hillary v Trump is an irrelevant discussion of which pack of establishment New Yorkers divy up the spoils of big government.

    As much as our esteemed host wouldn’t like this, I’d point out one very simple fact: Ted Cruz has never read How to Win Friends and Influence People. The man might be smart, but he has the charisma of a wet paper bag, and he annoys more people than like him. He will never be President, and he never had a realistic chance to become President. Even if Donald Trump hadn’t run, Senator Cruz would not have won the nomination, because people simply don’t like him very much.

    The coldly realistic Dana (f6a568)

  163. Where do you live, urbanleftbehind?

    Not Texas, I’m pretty sure.

    In fact, I’m pretty sure that Ted Cruz’ standing among officers in the Dallas Police Department — whatever it may have been, high or low in an absolute sense — is rather higher today than it was the day before yesterday.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  164. @ Realistic Dana (#163): Did you say the same things about Reagan in 1976, I wonder?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  165. 162… the Boris and Natasha thing, Beldar!

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  166. Wow, the Trumpkins really broke out of the asylum today.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  167. Mr. Trump is so good everyone should vote for him!

    Stinkypig must be stopped even in spite of Ted Cruz – for freedom, for prosperity, for America.

    I’m so excited to be coming to the end of the food stamp/stinkypig era but we can’t do it without your help!

    Please everyone do what you can in spite of Ted Cruz to save America thank you for listening

    happyfeet (a037ad) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:51 am

    yes yes!

    vote for the Don. vote for the smellypig! let’s end the stinkpig era and bring in the smellypig era! it’ll be great!

    its for America! ignore those principles about liberty and the Constitution that Mr. Cruz talked about

    those are worthless because we have the Don

    he will stamp out those principles and save America!

    he will get his goldy sacks on his cabinet and we’ll be really grand!

    making trump great again

    sadfeet (e04f50)

  168. Seriously: Did Reagan pee on the carpet in 1976? Because he didn’t endorse Ford. He instead gave a speech that the press described, accurately, as the first time there had ever been a second presidential-nomination acceptance speech at a GOP convention.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  169. @ Col. H (#166): Thanks, I understand now! And yeah, you’re abosolutely right.

    I regret comparing Mrs. Trump voice & accent to Natasha Fatale’s. But worse, I’ve seriously insulted Boris Badenov, whom I deem an entirely respectable villain.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  170. Squishlandia, 10th CD, Illinois and thats as specific as I’ll get.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  171. It’ll be nice when this whole thing is over and I can come back to participating in the comments again.

    Eric in Hollywood (6e8226)

  172. @ Dana Who: If I were a GOP congressman or state legislator in a close race anywhere in the country, I’d be happy that Ted Cruz urged all GOP voters to not stay home. Ted Cruz did a positive service for the GOP, he did it well and graciously, and he’s getting close to zero credit for that from people who should know better, including you.

    He didn’t give Trump the blow-job he wanted. Too damn bad for Trump.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  173. Seriously, that’s what all this Trumpkin whining today reminds me of: A bad-tempered college frat boy who’s angry that after he’s attempted to rape his date, she wouldn’t give him a blowy just to be a sport, nor even a good-night kiss.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  174. Last night, Clown Wallace (FNS) said the joke is “why do most people take an instant dislike to Ted Cruz? A: to save time”

    Never have warmed to that smarmy, little prick.

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  175. lol Beldar said blowy

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  176. Wallace the “junior” became a living embodiment of that sculpture in Balki’s (or should I say Milo Y’s) art gallery in Beverly Hills Cop

    https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQhqN1viRi7VbBb03zTKHxKpuhhkomzTO4HREWBvOiu1jafFiSE

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  177. Ailes has resigned from Fox.

    Cruz has been sent packing.

    Trump to deliver acceptance speech.

    And all is right with the world.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  178. No, you’re still here. aspca

    Colonel Haiku (697687)

  179. Seriously, that’s what all this Trumpkin whining

    What are you talking about whining? We’ve won one huge battle and are on track to have a great shot of winning the next.

    Are you guys completely delusional or something?

    Projection much?

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  180. Mr. Trump will win in spite of Ted Cruz

    you’ll see

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  181. Hmm. Patterico wrote:

    If you can’t respect a man who stands up for his family, get out of my face.

    I hope he means it. It’s his site. Which he pays for.

    Simon Jester (2b5dd3)

  182. Beldar (fa637a) — 7/21/2016 @ 11:57 am

    Cruz didn’t specifically reveal his own views as to whether Donald J. Trump (whom he congratulated on winning the nomination as the first order of business in his speech) is, indeed, someone whom voters should trust to defend our liberties and our Constitution.

    Or whether anybody was. That’s why I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  183. Cruz has proven himself this season a “miserable son-of-a-bitch” and is done as a presidential candidate in perpetuity.

    DNF (ffe548)

  184. Newt Gingrich proceeded to interpret Ted Cruz as saying #NeverHillary and therefore Trump, and this must have been planned by the Trump campaign when they agreed to let Cruz say it.

    Beldar:

    The least provocative thing Cruz could do, though, was to remain silent.

    I think you mean say the least provocative and not dishonest, or servile thing he could say on that point.

    That’s not dog-whistling, Mr. Finkelman. A dog-whistle would be a message that some people didn’t get. The problem is, claims to have detected dog whistling are often nthing more than implausible and disreputable lies, not only about the person saying whatever somebody said, but about the target audience, too, that the first speaker is supposedly trying to reach.

    What I meant by a dog whistle was that the phrase “please…vote your conscience” had a meaning many people could miss, and that was:

    DON’T vote for the lesser of the two evils.

    I think the Trump campaign knew what it meant, and encouraged Newt Gingrich to interpret it differently.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  185. > Primary election laws are set by the state government, not the parties.

    Yes and no, within limits. The right of a political party to set the rules for selecting that party’s nominee is guaranteed by the first amendment, subject to constraints imposed on the states by other amendments. See California Democratic Party v. Jones (https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-401.ZO.html), in which the Democratic and Republican parties of California sued to get the state’s blanket primary overturned and *won*.

    aphrael (f5f405)

  186. Geoerge W. Bush is reported to have told some friends privately

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  187. Sammy, ‘vote your conscience’ is not a secret code. It’s not saying “vote Trump”. It’s not saying “vote Hillary”. It’s saying do what you believe is right with your vote.

    This is plain as day. Cruz could have endorsed either candidate, but did not. He is not bashful about standing against his party, or for it. He doesn’t have any advice to give on Hillary v Trump, and I don’t think anyone here can give a compelling reason why he should.

    Trump and Hillary are so similar in record and in the kind of people they are. One has the D and one has the R, but that means nothing these days.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  188. nobody needs harvardtrash ted’s permission to vote their conscience

    it’s not even a good idea it’s a pooper idea

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  189. hatefulface, Cruz didn’t purport to give anyone “permission.”

    You live in a fantasy world, don’t you? Do they breathe oxygen in your galaxy?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  190. well good

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  191. Why it is categorically RIGHT that Ted Cruz was booed:

    FLASHBACK: Ted Cruz PROMISES to Endorse Donald Trump on National TV (VIDEO)

    Bret Baier: Senator Cruz will you support Donald Trump if he is the nominee?

    Senator Ted Cruz:
    Yes, because I gave my word I would. And what I have endeavored to do every day in the senate is do what I said I would do.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  192. Ted Cruz’s ego and ambition put his family in that white spot light.

    I’m sure a guy as well read as he is familiar with Nancy Reagan, Kitty Dukkakis, Betty Ford et al.

    I’m not saying all’s fair but quit acting shocked.

    Pinandpuller (928ad9)

  193. We’ve won one huge battle and are on track to have a great shot of winning the next.

    Well, Cruz rallied the GOP to get out and vote, and instead of thanking Cruz you guys are whining that he did not kiss the ass of the man who repeatedly smeared his wife and father with lies, innuendo, and outright childish insults. Cruz was the bigger man and did the GOP a favor, but instead of accepting that, you guys want him to humiliate his family and himself and you’re whining that he did not.

    Carson was compared to a psycho and a child molester and endorsed Trump anyway. Rubio had arguments are penis size with Trump and endorsed him anyway. Perry was insulted as an idiot and kiss Trump’s ring. Perhaps these are the kind of men Trump is used to seeing around the office his daddy’s money bought, but I don’t have any time for such ‘leaders’. America should be better than that.

    America will be great again when the concept of self respect makes a come-back. The GOP just nominated a reality show star who bragged that he ditched the mother of his kids because an employee was a “hot piece of ass”. A guy who makes Bill Clinton look like a marriage counselor.

    Good luck in November with that.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  194. I’m not saying all’s fair but quit acting shocked.

    They’re just all butthurt that a lawyer who goes on about “muh constitution” and “muh sacred word” was beat by a businessperson who is all about real-world results.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  195. Well, Cruz rallied the GOP to get out and vote

    Cruz promised he would endorse and support the nominee specifically, and Donald Trump by name if he won, not just down the ticket.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  196. Will you guys still be arguing about Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and how wonderful you consciences are during Hillary’s inauguration, or are you gonna take a break to watch the festivities?

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6)

  197. Denver Guy, have you ever financed a car or taken out a home mortgage? Serious question here.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  198. Ted Cruz’s ego and ambition put his family in that white spot light.

    I’m sure a guy as well read as he is familiar with Nancy Reagan, Kitty Dukkakis, Betty Ford et al.

    I’m not saying all’s fair but quit acting shocked.

    Pinandpuller

    Wow, that’s amazing. It’s Cruz’s fault that Donald Trump smeared his wife and posted ugly photos of her on the internet. It’s Cruz’s fault that Trump insinuated his dad helped murder JFK on idiotic conspiracy theories.

    At the same time, you guys act like Trump was entitled to endorsements from Cruz! No concept of consistency at all. If Trump did something nasty and below the belt, it’s not his fault because life’s unfair and them’s the breaks. If Trump’s nastiness keeps him from getting support, well that’s a huge injustice and just UNFAIR (pounds table).

    Childish!

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  199. Yeah, Beldar.

    You’re going to do some lawyer thing here which is relevant to you lawyers and also why you lost the nomination.

    The fact that Donald Trump said he didn’t need Ted Cruz’s support doesn’t change the fact that Ted Cruz promised it, to the American people and not just Trump. And the country should come first, defeating Hillary Clinton.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  200. Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/21/2016 @ 2:44 pm

    vote your conscience’ is not a secret code. It’s not saying “vote Trump”. It’s not saying “vote Hillary”. It’s saying do what you believe is right with your vote.

    Specifically, that’s saying vote for someone you know will probably lose, rather than vooting for the lesser of two evils, and he also said, don’t avoid voting.

    And in this case, he elaborated, don’t vote for someone you don’t trust “to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.” This morning, Cruz seemed to say, that that excluded Hillary. At least he said he wouldn’t vote for Hillary. He did not say whether Trump fit the bill, or if anyone on the ballot in Texas did. You know, that sounds like another shoe is about to drop.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  201. I object to people insisting Trump ‘approved’ or allowed the speech. Trump knew Cruz wouldn’t give an endorsement weeks ago. Trump didn’t see or know that Cruz was not only not endorsing, but actively encouraging people to not vote for the Republican candidate, on the Republican stage, at the Republican Convention until a few hours before, when Trump had a sophie’s choice to make:
    1) A futile attempt to censor Cruz
    2) Pull Cruz and find a last minute alternate, in the public eye
    3) Let Cruz self immolate

    That was a really crappy situation for Cruz to present to Trump in the midst of his convention after Trump invited him to speak despite the bad blood on both sides.

    Trump chose 3, not because it was necessarily best for Trump, but because Trump personally disliked Cruz enough to be willing to take a bad news cycle for Trump in order to allow Cruz to permanently self harm.

    Even if the Cruz faction in 2020 is big enough to win the R nomination, he now has no legitimate claim to call the dissenters to fall in line and support the party nominee. That makes his general election chances extremely poor, which fatally weakens his appeal as candidate for nominee. Like or hate Trump, Cruz 2020 went down in flames last night.

    I can accept and personally lean toward ideological loyalty over party loyalty, but you can not honestly take that stance at a party party. Cruz should have stayed away from the convention, or given a boring pro-Republican speech, or given an anti-Hillary speech, the only thing he shouldn’t have done is try to shiv the party’s nominee. Cruz ended up stabbing his own aspiration to be that nominee in the future in the back. Unfortunate, but that is what I watched last night.

    noway (2640f4)

  202. Cruz promised he would endorse and support the nominee specifically, and Donald Trump by name if he won, not just down the ticket.

    Denver Guy

    No he didn’t. Your link proves he didn’t.

    Also, you are right that the pledge agreement was broken. You are wrong that Cruz broke it.

    Trump broke the pledge.

    “Do you continue to pledge [to support] whoever the Republican nominee is?” Cooper asked.

    “No, I don’t anymore,” Trump replied.

    Denver Guy, you say breaking the pledge justifies withholding support. Trump broke the pledge. Are you intellectually honest enough to condemn Trump in the allcaps you used on Cruz?

    Of course why should Cruz honor one end of a deal with someone who refused to keep his side of it? That’s not how agreements work. Both sides have to live up to it. Trump broke the deal, to the extent that he warned of riots if he’s not nominated. Trump is really good at making deals and breaking them. Every promise he’s made is a con.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  203. It was a bad thing to promise to support the nominee, whoever it is, and I don’t think the American people want something like that.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  204. IF Ted Cruz hadn’t defended his wife and father after the Orange Weasel smeared them, I wouldn’t have any confidence he’d stand up for my country either.

    Cruz 2020

    bitterclinger (91db80)

  205. It was a bad thing to promise to support the nominee, whoever it is

    Well in this case, he promised to support Donald Trump specifically. And Cruz was mainly respectful of and supportive of Donald Trump until later in the race when it was becoming a two-man race.

    Cruz is about his ambition, not the country. Trump, on the other hand, has already bravely endured an assassination attempt, and I doubt it’s the last one.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  206. Trump chose 3, not because it was necessarily best for Trump, but because Trump personally disliked Cruz enough to be willing to take a bad news cycle for Trump in order to allow Cruz to permanently self harm.

    Noway,

    Clearly that is how Trump sees it. He intended damage to one of the GOP’s best Senators because he doesn’t like him. He will actively damage those in the party who do not kiss his ass, even if there’s no benefit to him directly. Trump just accepted a job of winning the presidential election. He isn’t doing that job. He’s fracturing the party, more than it was before the convention. The convention was an expensive exercise in bringing the GOP back together after a terrible primary, and Trump ruined it.

    Now, you’re pretending Cruz’s speech was harmful to Trump, but Cruz congratulated Trump as the nominee, then offered a great speech about America, and told Republicans to get out and vote. He merely didn’t say for whom. All Trump had to do was thank Cruz for the congratulations and say he embraces Cruz’s vision and hopes Republicans see him as the best vote.

    But like you said, Trump wanted to damage Cruz even if it’s bad for Trump too. Which it was. All I can say is good luck in November. Trump thinks it would be great if Hillary were president, and I think that’s why he never acts like it’s important that he bring the party together.

    A better man than Trump would have apologized for smearing Cruz’s family, and gave Cruz a face saving way to endorse him. By refusing to do so, Trump is a pig and a fool. Cruz was faced with a simple choice between the GOP and his family.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  207. Hey, happyfeet!

    You read what Patterico wrote, right?

    Please comment on it. In detail.

    I want to see you own your words to Patterico instead of running your mouth with your silly “clown nose on, clown nose off” act.

    It’s fine to disagree with a politician. Attacks on family or your weird Jon Stewart on mushrooms act, not so much.

    Go ahead.

    Simon Jester (2b5dd3)

  208. @ Denver Guy (#200): Okay, you say you’ve entered into a contract in which the finance company loaned you money, and promised that if you paid them back, they’d give you clear title to your house or your car. Right?

    So if you stop paying the money, do they still have to give you clear title?

    No, sir. They will foreclose.

    See, when parties make pledges about what they’ll do together in the future, and one of them breaks his promise, then the other side is excused — legally and morally, in every way — from having to do what it contractually promised to do on its part (allow you clear title).

    Yes, there is no question whatsoever that Cruz pledged to endorse the GOP nominee. You keep posting comments and links to prove that. But it’s undisputed, you idiot.

    You likewise keep arguing that Cruz didn’t endorse Trump. That’s also undisputed.

    What you dishonestly or stupidly — one or the other, those are the only options — refuse to address is the subject of whether Cruz’ failure to perform the back end of his promise is excused by Trump’s own repudiation of the promise, especially as compounded and aggravated by Trump’s shameful and lying personal attacks on Cruz’s wife and father.

    That’s why you’re a Trumpkin shill. You’re using exactly the same kinds of logic and persuasion — which is to say, the same misleading flim-flam and misdirection — that Trump uses.

    Congratulations, you probably have a career waiting on reality TV, or at least as a pyramid marketer, Denver Guy.

    But I advise you not to miss any mortgage or car payments, dude.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  209. Trump, on the other hand, has already bravely endured an assassination attempt, and I doubt it’s the last one.

    Denver Guy

    Denver Guy, wipe the stars out of your eyes and read my comment where I point out that Trump broke the pledge.

    “Do you continue to pledge [to support] whoever the Republican nominee is?” Cooper asked.

    “No, I don’t anymore,” Trump replied.

    Be honest enough to admit it.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  210. Where is Amanda Carpenter?

    mg (31009b)

  211. What you dishonestly or stupidly — one or the other, those are the only options — refuse to address is the subject of whether Cruz’ failure to perform the back end of his promise is excused by Trump’s own repudiation of the promise

    The problem with your argument is the promise mainly was not for Trump’s personal benefit, it was for the party’s and the country’s benefit.

    Trump didn’t boo Cruz. The party did.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  212. Beldar,

    Well said in #209. I didn’t have the patience to explain it like that, but that’s exactly right.

    Trump filed for bankruptcy on this pledge. His shills refuse to address this just as any entitled deadbeat does when the repo man shows up. Cruz owes Trump nothing, and Cruz promised to honor his wife when they married. That’s another sort of pledge Trump did not keep.

    I really am impressed by how Cruz walked this tightrope, doing what he can for the GOP without betraying his word to those who matter most to him.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  213. The main contention of #nevertrump ers is that Trump will be way worse than Clinton.

    With WJ running the economy and Obama burrowing in DC we will have the triumverate of the apocalypse.

    Cruz riding in 2020 to save Helming Deep seems pretty far fetched with Hillary pulling out all of the stops on third world citizenship upgrades.

    If it isn’t THAT bad for the pebble in the shoe crowd why is anyone convinced it wouldn’t be 2012 all over again?

    Pinandpuller (c16705)

  214. Cruz owes Trump nothing

    He owes the party and the country, particularly in face of a Hillary Clinton presidency.

    Denver Guy (21d3a4)

  215. The problem with your argument is the promise mainly was not for Trump’s personal benefit, it was for the party’s and the country’s benefit.

    Trump didn’t boo Cruz. The party did.

    Denver Guy

    You’re not responding to Beldar’s argument at all. Trump broke the pledge. You say this agreement was important, but you don’t care that Trump broke it.

    And no, it wasn’t the party booing Cruz. The booing was Trump’s campaign deliberately making another weeklong scandal because that’s how they have run their entire campaign. One newsworthy mess after enough because bad news beats no news. I bet if the primary were held today, Cruz v Trump, only Republicans voting and just the two candidates, Trump wouldn’t stand a chance.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  216. He owes the party and the country, particularly in face of a Hillary Clinton presidency.

    Denver Guy

    Yeah, and note how Cruz supported the GOP and his country in his awesome speech, which I suspect you never even watched.

    Note all those remarks about Republicans voting. Cruz is helping down ticket candidates quite a bit, not just in word but in deed. Did you know that? Cruz has been the most effective critic of Hillary I know of. Cruz’s anti Hillary ads are awesome. Trump, on the other hand, donated to Hillary’s presidential campaign and said she would be a great president.

    You keep saying these things about Cruz and acting like they prove he is terrible, but when I note that Trump did those things (breaking the pledge, helping Hillary, screwing the GOP) you just ignore it. Why not some intellectual consistency? You would have more credibility if you could admit any fault in your ‘guy’.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  217. The main contention of #nevertrump ers is that Trump will be way worse than Clinton.

    This isn’t true.

    I’m the most outspoken on that particular matter on this blog (anyone correct me if I’m wrong).

    On most matters I don’t think they would be that different. Trump endorsed Hillary on most of her positions in 2008, and they’ve been buddies for almost as long as Trump’s been pals with Reid. They are clearly on the same page on gun control and amnesty, on crossgenders in bathrooms, and big government coming to help us with everything. Hillary probably would pick worse judges, but who knows? Trump won’t pick anyone who won’t kiss his ass, which rules out most great conservatives.

    Although the GOP itself would be very different. Imagine a GOP run by a very squishy RINO. How effective would it be in enacting big government programs? I suspect very effective. Imagine a GOP opposing, say Bill Clinton. The GOP was at its best in the mid 90s. They reduced deficit spending and enacted welfare reform.

    So while Hillary and Trump aren’t that different, and clearly Hillary is not ‘way better’ than Trump on most matters, the GOP is systematically superior opposing the left than run by the left. And the democrats are of the left either way.

    Also, I do think Hillary is more knowledgable and would be ‘wrong within normal parameters’ to steal a line I like. Trump is a bit of a nutjob and who knows what he would do to our allies overseas over the slightest problem? As an example, look how Trump has caused this huge problem with party unity, because he didn’t get his ass kissed enough. What an unstrategic egomaniac! What happens when Australia’s government pulls out of the F-35 program or South Korea makes a deal with China? I hate to give Hillary any credit, but I think she would handle these problems better than Trump could.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  218. Cruz — in contrast to many other high-ranking Republican leaders who’ve stayed away from Cleveland — showed up to support the GOP. He expressly and enthusiastically urged voters not to stay home. He urged them to vote for candidates up and down the ballot whom the voters conscientiously (that is, after consideration of their consciences) believe will defend our liberties and our Constitution. He said not a single bad word about the presidential nominee, but rather, congratulated him. He’s been effusive in his praise of the vice-presidential-nominee-presumptive, Gov. Pence. He’ll campaign and fundraise for Republicans at the state and federal level across the United States between now and November, many of whom will be glad to have Cruz’ help and support even though they wouldn’t be caught in the same time zone with Donald Trump.

    So get off your horse, shill, about how Ted Cruz is the one betraying his obligations to the GOP because of personal spite. Cruz is more than satisfying all reasonable expectations about how he can help the GOP in this election.

    It’s only through the nasty, narrow, dishonest, incoherent, and biased lens of Trump’s personality cult that anyone can find fault with Cruz’ performance as a good Republican this week.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  219. I completely support your position, Patterico!let this site become better.

    felipe (d96360)

  220. Trump abused Rick Perry and now Perry is making the rounds for Trump.
    I wish Perry would not have run in 2012. He could have won in 2016.

    mg (31009b)

  221. Couldn’t agree more! I will vote trump (while dying a little inside). It’s a male NY liberal bully v. a female one… But Trump’s evil is only very slightly less than Hillary’s and I think he might actually like this country (she clearly does not).

    Carlos (bea886)

  222. Ted accepted a party invitation, came, then proceeded to publicly tell the host that he sucks. Zero class.

    Boris (bc52ec) — 7/21/2016 @ 9:37 am

    He never said anything of the sort (quote it, if I’m wrong), rather he said to vote your conscience:

    And to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. Stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.

    If Mr. Trump was smart, he should have declared victory and said, “Thank you Ted, that describes me perfectly and I believe the exact same thing.”

    But he didn’t, because he isn’t.

    Pons Asinorum (337e21)

  223. Ted Cruz = George Romney

    mg (31009b)

  224. Wish granted.
    You really are suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome.
    If some world leader/adversary insults the President’s family, do work within the system or just push the button?
    And they accuse Trump of having a thin skin. Sheesh.

    Richard654 (03173a)

  225. If you’re voting for Donald Trump because you think he’s the lesser of two evils; because you think Hillary is clearly worse; because you reject leftism and know Hillary will foist leftism on us and only suspect Trump might . . . then you and I are cool. I respect that position.

    I think Trump is the greater of the two evils, but I’m still thinking of recanting my NeverTrumpism for one reason only: the prospect that Trump might be impeached, or something might happen to him, and we’d get a President Pence. Pence is far from perfect, but he’s acceptable, and it would be worth putting up with less than a year of Trump to get more than three years of Pence.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  226. Ted Cruz:

    And to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. Stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.

    Pons Asinorum (337e21) — 7/21/2016 @ 4:02 pm

    If Mr. Trump was smart, he should have declared victory and said, “Thank you Ted, that describes me perfectly and I believe the exact same thing.”

    But he didn’t, because he isn’t.

    He had him booed, but he also had, or Newt gingricch volunteered to, interpret what ted Cruz had said.

    Newt Gngrich did not day that described Donald Trump, because to say so would mean it was a question. He simply said that did not describe Hillary Clinton, and that left Donald Trump.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r3Rump6XCc At 1:40 Through 2:38 Newt Gingrich:

    ..to paraphrase Ted Cruz, if you want to protect the Constitution of the United States, the only possible candidate this fall is the Trump-Pence Republican ticket.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  227. If some world leader/adversary insults the President’s family, do work within the system or just push the button?

    So Richard, you’re saying that Cruz’s statement was equivalent to using nuclear weapons. Here’s the offending statement:

    And to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. Stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.

    Admit it, you don’t think this is that bad. You just hate Cruz because reasons.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  228. #42 Well said.

    felipe (d96360)

  229. However, I think it a tad rude to ‘crash’ Trump’s party and not endorse him

    It’s not Trump’s party (and he can cry if he wants to). It’s the Republican convention, and Cruz, unlike Trump, is a Republican.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  230. Anyone criticizing Cruz today has to be willing to say: “Donald Trump could mock my wife’s looks, and slander my dad, and I would support him.”

    Not to mention the vicious smear against Cruz himself. By the way, whatever happened to all those imminent revelations about all his supposed women? We never heard any more about them, did we? Because they never existed outside the diseased imaginations of the Trump flacks who invented them.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  231. Beldar (fa637a) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:05 am

    Exactly.

    felipe (d96360)

  232. Dustin, I don’t think it is right, fair or correct to say Trump damaged Cruz. Trump allowed Cruz a platform. Cruz damaged Cruz with that platform. Trump tried for party unity by giving Cruz a platform. Cruz used it for disunity.

    Cruz left Trump had no good options; neither option 1 nor 2 as I laid them out could have created party unity out of the situation Cruz created. Had Trump denied Cruz the ability to address his many delegates, you could have laid disunity on Trump. Trump allowed Cruz to speak, implicitly trusting Cruz to do the right thing for the party, probably trusting because it was the right thing for Cruz himself. Cruz rejected party unity, now and in 2020.

    If you want to be a columnist or talk radio host, ideology at the complete expense of party can work well. If you want to be a party nominee…not so much.

    noway (2640f4)

  233. Colonel Haiku (697687) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:29 am

    LOL,Colonel.

    Actually there are plenty of pundits on the alt-right using the term dog whistle today in regards to Cruz’s statements.

    Left uses that expression all the time as well to imply racism.
    Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:51 am

    Good catch, Dustin!

    felipe (d96360)

  234. If Cruz had really wanted to needle Trump while appearing to praise him, the speech would have gone like this, Trumpkins:

    CRUZ:
    Friends, Republicans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
    I come to bury Conservatism (for this election cycle), not to praise him.
    The evil that men do lives after them;
    The good is oft interred with their bones;
    So let it be with Conservatism. The noble Trump
    Hath told you Conservatism was ambitious:
    If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
    And grievously hath Conservatism answer’d it.
    Here, under leave of Trump and the rest–
    For Trump is an honourable man;
    So are they all, all honourable men–
    Come I to speak in Conservatism’s funeral.
    He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
    But Trump says he was ambitious;
    And Trump is an honourable man.
    He hath brought many decades of liberty to America
    Whose prosperity did the general coffers fill:
    Did this in Conservatism seem ambitious?
    When that the poor have cried, Conservatism hath wept:
    Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
    Yet Trump says he was ambitious;
    And Trump is an honourable man.
    ….
    I speak not to disprove what Trump spoke,
    But here I am to speak what I do know.
    You all did love Conservatism once, not without cause:
    What cause withholds you then, to mourn for him?
    O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
    And men have lost their reason.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  235. Rush Limbaugh said one result of this (he thoyught deliberate on the part of trump) was getting aratings bonanza for his speech tonight,

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  236. Trump allowed Cruz a platform.

    Noway, I disagree. Cruz was entitled to that speaking slot. He won many states and millions of Republican votes. This is the Republican convention and of course he was entitled to speak. Booing Cruz is the same as booing his supporters, and that will be a problem for Trump in November.

    Cruz damaged Cruz with that platform. Trump tried for party unity by giving Cruz a platform. Cruz used it for disunity.

    Trump and Cruz made an agreement. Cruz wouldn’t cause problems with the delegate votes, and Cruz wouldn’t make an outright endorsement. This deal was well understood. Trump’s campaign saw Cruz’s speech and made no complaints. Nor do I see any reason for them to. The offending passage is not at all critical of Trump. The speech congratulates Trump.

    But Trump decided to make a big stink about the speech anyway, and some thoughtless became outraged over this:

    And to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. Stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.

    Telling republicans to show up and vote. Woop de do. I hear no disunity in the speech. I hear disunity in the booing. In Trump again lashing out at Cruz. And in Trump not apologizing for his smearing of Cruz’s family. It’s a shame Trump never did that as it’s the only way Cruz could endorse Trump and save face. Trump wanted to put Cruz in this position. If he kiss’s Trump’s ass after the insults to his family, Trump has somehow won the Bully Dominance prize, the way he did with Rubio, Carson, Perry, and most of the GOP establishment. He leveraged Cruz’s family against party unity.

    At the end of the day, it’s not Cruz’s job to unify Trump’s support anyway. That’s on Trump. And come november, I don’t think Trump will be any more successful with this than he was with casinos, universities, or his 2008 support of Hillary (again, why is this democrat entitled to my support?).

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  237. Sheriff Joe speaks tonight. c-span

    mg (31009b)

  238. By the way, whatever happened to all those imminent revelations about all his supposed women? We never heard any more about them, did we? Because they never existed outside the diseased imaginations of the Trump flacks who invented them.

    Milhouse

    Milhouse is right. Trump also said he had a bunch of dirt on Cruz’s wife he would leak, but nothing came of it and Cruz never backed off. Trump is just a bastard, basically.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  239. Wrong. If Trump loses big, Cruz is seen as prescient. If Trump loses narrowly, Cruz is seen as culpable.

    You mean like all the folks who push Trump now but wouldn’t vote for Romney or McCain (who lost narrowly)?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  240. 188. Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/21/2016 @ 2:44 pm

    Sammy, ‘vote your conscience’ is not a secret code.

    Today, in, I think, the lead story in the CBS Evening News the reporter narrating said it was a code, although he didn’t use the word secret.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  241. Sammy, here’s my interpretation:

    Republicans, do show up and vote, even if you’re not happy with the nominee. Vote because of all the downticket races. And vote your conscience for president, one way or the other. Hillary or Trump or third party or not at all.

    I think this is a straightfoward interpretation of the passage Trump and Palin are freaking out about. It is not an endorsement by any stretch. It’s not an attack by any stretch. It’s just saying vote for whoever you want, but be sure to show up and vote because it’s important for a lot of other contests.

    I don’t find CBS to be very reputable and they, like Trump, find use in stirring up as much controversy as possible.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  242. Except, Beldar, that Trump was the one appealing to the emotions of the masses, not Cruz. Cruz, and the conservatives in general, come off like Brutus, talking about the principles of the Republic and not that the loved the Party less, but that they loved America more.

    And in any contest before the public, where one side appeals to reason and the other appeals to frothy emotion, it’s emotion that wins every time.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  243. Everyone talks about “speaking truth to power” but so few do it. This is why.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  244. “Trump is just a bastard, basically.”

    Among many other worse things. That’s precisely why his supporters are outraged that anyone would suggest voters follow their conscience with their vote. Trump supporters see the admonition to follow conscience as recognition and acknowledgement that conscience and principle must be abandoned as a matter of course in order to support this gutter scum.

    Rick Ballard (04482a)

  245. Mark Burns Now Television network founder and president is rocking the house.

    mg (31009b)

  246. I’m the most outspoken on that particular matter on this blog (anyone correct me if I’m wrong).

    Hmmm. I’m up there somewhere. So is Beldar. So is Patrick.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  247. “Trump is just a bastard, basically.”

    Among many other worse things. That’s precisely why his supporters are outraged that anyone would suggest voters follow their conscience with their vote. Trump supporters see the admonition to follow conscience as recognition and acknowledgement that conscience and principle must be abandoned as a matter of course in order to support this gutter scum.

    +1

    nk (dbc370)

  248. Hmmm. I’m up there somewhere. So is Beldar. So is Patrick.

    Kevin M

    That’s true and I respect that you all have great principles. All three of you are more articulate than I am. I think I’m the only one actually saying I think Hillary would be better, but I could be mistaken.

    Trump supporters see the admonition to follow conscience as recognition and acknowledgement that conscience and principle must be abandoned as a matter of course in order to support this gutter scum.

    Rick Ballard

    LOL. Yes, you have a point. Palin in particular seems really awful now. I used to defend her when she couldn’t remember anything she had read, and when her family did one terrible thing after another. When she began doing reality show after show. When she didn’t run against Mirkowski. Now I see I was a sucker with Palin. I interpreted deep values, but they weren’t actually on display. I assumed them because Palin had a lot of the right enemies. Turns out she hates a call to conscience because she knows she’s supporting an evil man.

    It would be one thing if Palin, like many, admitted Trump is sickening, but if it’s between him and Hillary she prefers Trump and hopes the rest of the government keeps him in check. Though this is not my position, it’s much more honest than lining up to kiss the ring of a degenerate who built an empire of sleaze and reneged when it was time to pay for it. And of Palin in particular I see no concession or acknowledgement of the other point of view (of my point of view). It’s Trump’s way or the highway. None of the millions of Republicans who disagree with her are worth spit, apparently, if they agree with Cruz. I think this is because Palin needs to be kingmaker to have any relevance. If Cruz is ever successful in the future, it means she isn’t relevant. This is a good warning to those of us who like Cruz. I don’t put that much stock in any politician.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  249. However…

    We are now at the point where Trump IS the nominee and the only person who, at this point in time, that has a chance of denying Hillary the presidency. This isn’t the choice I wanted, but it IS a choice. Half the world doesn’t get this much. Is it enough of one to care?

    What are the alternatives?

    1) By all indications, a Hillary victory would mean a corrupt 4-year extension of an untenable status quo, and rather than reform it, a platform that calls for doubling down.

    2) Assuming that Trump is not a complete fraud*, his victory would amount to kicking over the table, forcing a sink or swim approach to reform.**

    As it stands, I will probably go with Door Number 2, hoping that there will be enough good people stepping up to salvage the collapse of the Blue Model while there is still time.
    ______
    * if he is, we have a less competent version of case 1

    ** suboptimum, but better than no reform

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  250. Kevin M: Let’s be sure we’re on the same page. You probably know this, but for those who don’t, or forgot: Brutus and his gang of fellow Senators murdered Julius Caesar; Shakespeare wrote about it. In my parody version, Cruz is Antony, and Trump has just murdered Conservatism. When nevertheless permitted by Brutus and his fellows to speak at Caesar’s funeral, Antony didn’t accuse Brutus even though Brutus was guilty; instead, he praised Brutus. It was insincere praise, used to damn Brutus. Not damn him with the masses only, but to all the friends, Romans, and countrymen.

    Get it now? Debaters talk about “going all ‘Brutus is an honourable man'” on someone as a tactic. Cruz was the national champion in college debate; he’s trained in rhetoric. He could have mocked and belittled Trump while using “code” or hiding behind some fig leaf of slippery language.

    He didn’t. He made no frothy emotional appeal to vote against Trump, did he? He congratulated Trump, and that’s the last time he directly mentioned Trump.

    So Cruz didn’t do in real life what my Cruz-as-Antony does in the parody. He had grounds to do an Antony-type attack on Trump. But he didn’t. His actual speech doesn’t undercut Trump unless one starts with the premise that a vote in accordance with conscience is necessarily a vote against Trump. That’s the only way you can read anything Cruz said as a suggestion not to vote for Trump.

    I’m not sure if we’re disagreeing or not, but that’s the Cliff Notes version of my parody, if that makes my own views more clear.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  251. i’m so happy cause of Mr. Cruz did swan song and Mr. Trump is on his way to the president house

    oh what splendid adventures we’re going to have!

    so many startling betterments on the path to a renewed America with so many possibilities and opportunities

    there’s a place for us

    somewhere a place for us!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  252. Wrong. If Trump loses big, Cruz is seen as prescient. If Trump loses narrowly, Cruz is seen as culpable.

    Ford lost very narrowly, and it didn’t hurt Reagan.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  253. So when Cruz said to vote our conscience up and down ticket, I wonder if he has any idea how many votes he lost for Republicans down ticket? Trump is the response to the GOP clown show. How can I vote for anybody that was part of that? In good conscience.

    East Bay Jay (c65ac0)

  254. Mr Cruz wasn’t being Reagan; he was being Regan, from The Exorcist, peeing on the carpet.

    Really? How was what he did different from what Reagan did?

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  255. There is some measure of grace in the Clintons. There is none in the Trumps. Maybe Mike Spence will bring it in the next three and a half months.

    nk (dbc370)

  256. Kevin @ 250 makes the honest cast for voting Trump.

    if he is, we have a less competent version of case 1

    And the stakes are huge, because the worst case scenario for Trump is a man who uses government against criticism in the press, who sues opponents and critics for frivolous matters, who praises communist abuses, who is hateful to good allies, and who actually is totally clueless about world affairs in an extremely dangerous period in world history. We could lose many allies as countries like Australia continue to edge towards China’s relatively more stable sphere.

    The worse stereotypes about America would be confirmed. Wars and famines would necessarily result. A lot of lives consumed.

    I sincerely think Trump is that man the founders designed our government to protect against, and Obama has destroyed many of those protections. Faith in the military is high, faith in civilian law enforcement is under assault, faith in elected leaders is nonexistent. And Trump thinks the answer, when the natives get restless, is to show strength in stomping them to silence.

    It’s just too much of a risk to vote for Trump. If Trump is everything he promises, reform still doesn’t happen. Nothing really changes, actually. Even on immigration, Trump’s admitted he’s for touchback amnesty. And Hillary would remind the GOP what it’s supposed to be about.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  257. The fact lay simply that in the profession he has chosen, Ted Cruz broke his pledge– that is, his word– to support the party nominee.

    No, he didn’t. That pledge was cancelled the moment Trump renounced it.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  258. Mr. Finkelman, re “getting the code past the censor,” i.e., those in the Trump campaign who’d read it word-for word but didn’t object:

    For your theory to be right, everyone in the American public has to know the code, but no one on the Trump campaign can know it. Now given who they had write Mrs. Trump’s speech and what she did, maybe the Trump campaign personnel, up to and including the nominee, are really that stupid. But it would have been risky for Sen. Cruz to bet on that.

    Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. You can put any interpretation you like on it. But don’t insist that yours is necessarily what Sen. Cruz’ intended. Don’t ignore the face value of the words. Sen. Cruz is big on actually looking at texts. Or do you think his speech was supposed to be a living, breathing, evolving thing?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  259. Cruz was just like George Romney against Goldwater.

    mg (31009b)

  260. Trump: Your wife is an ugly crazy woman, and your father murdered the president.

    Actually Trump didn’t insinuate that Cruz’s father murdered the president. He insinuated that he murdered Oswald! It was clear that whoever told Trump of this juicy bit of gossip, that there was a photo of Cruz’s father with Oswald before the shooting, didn’t bother to tell him who Oswald was, assuming that he knew. And it was clear that Trump had no idea who this Oswald person was. He assumed that Oswald was some dude who was shot, and therefore that the significance of the photo was that Cruz Sr had shot Oswald, and that’s what he tried to insinuate. He really is an ignoranamus.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  261. . Cruz wasn’t hard on Trump at all in his speech

    This is true. I was expecting him to get at least one dig in. He spoke about areas where he and Trump were on the same page, and avoided areas where they weren’t. I wouldn’t have done that.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  262. it’s so easy to do criticize on Mr. Trump

    but he’s the only one

    the only one what can prevent the stinkypig oozing and poozing her stench on even the littlest children in the most remote villages

    I keep the dear man in my prayers for just this reason.

    If not him, who?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  263. You Can’t Always Get What Who You Want

    I saw him last night at the convention
    A flinty look in his eye
    I knew he would rue his rejection
    But he’s no bite the bullet kinda guy

    No, you can’t always get who you want
    You can’t always get who you want
    You can’t always get who you want
    But if you try sometime you find
    You get who you need

    I went down to the demonstration
    To get my fair share of abuse
    They said “We’re gonna vent our frustration
    If we don’t we’re gonna shoot some boys in blue”

    I said to them
    You can’t always get what you want
    You can’t always get what you want
    You can’t always get what you want
    But if you try sometimes well you just might find
    You get what you need

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  264. I’d like to see how the #nevertrump shakes out once Hillary rolls out her VP. That fortunate person is one coughing spell away from the presidency.

    We already know her muslim brotherhood gouma has Valerie Jarrett’s seat at the table and that a mission may be mounted to break Rahm out of his Carbonite prison.

    Pinandpuller (c16705)

  265. @258. Yes, he did.

    Then explain how The Great White Dope is no longer pledged to support the party nominee: himself.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  266. Then explain how The Great White Dope is no longer pledged to support the party nominee: himself.
    DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/21/2016 @ 5:50 pm

    You really are demented. Or maybe you were always stupid. Contracts are between two or more persons, not between one person and his own self.

    nk (dbc370)

  267. Patterico,
    Our dear host,
    It is starting to get to the end of your day out there.

    I agree, it is your virtual living room,
    and if you want to ban people who lack the common decency to defend a spouse,
    please do so.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  268. Tim Kaine has a fundraiser coming up in Massachusetts.

    mg (31009b)

  269. I’d like to see Trump stop trying to recruit #NeverTrumpers.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  270. “ACE OF SPADES: Yes, #NeverTrumpers, You Are In Fact Morally Responsible for the Hillary Clinton Presidency You’re Agitating For.”

    Read the whole thing.

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/239312/

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  271. Honestly a Ted Cruz endorsement probably wouldn’t move the needle much so who cares?

    Mitt Romney, OTOH, let’s throw that guy out of the Celestial Kingdom into outer darkness.

    We never knew thee.

    And speaking of con men and plagiarists-Mitt’s spiritual leader was right at the top of that murderer’s row.

    Pinandpuller (c16705)

  272. Col. nice read + I love that scene.

    mg (31009b)

  273. Read it. Ace leaves me unpersuaded, but I respect the viewpoint. I don’t share its premises, so I don’t agree with it.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  274. I see pudpuller has somehow found his way out from under his rock.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  275. Is some of you think that Barack’s AG, Loretta Lynch, is terrible, just wait until President Hillary nominates Loretta Lynch to be AG! (LOL)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  276. I’d respect Ace’s position more if it wasn’t based on this kind of patronizing straw man argument:

    I tried to explain to them that there is no such thing as a consequence-free choice — all choices have consequences, both on the upside and the downside — and both the upside and downswide [sic] consequences must be considered by any adult, intellectually-serious person in making his choice.

    I understand completely that if I don’t cast a vote for Trump, then will end up with one fewer vote. I understand that increases, at the margin, the chances that Hillary might win.

    But minimizing the chances that Hillary might win is not the only consideration I have when I’m deciding how to vote. It’s a big one, yup. But so’s my integrity.

    Ace doesn’t get to lecture me on my integrity. Nor does anyone else. I decide that.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  277. Col Haiku

    I gave up shitposting for ramadan.

    I figured this would be like the expendables where you finally figured out we are on the same side.

    Pinandpuller (c16705)

  278. A bitter pill to swallow, sure, Beldar. But, unfortunately, more truth there than many mega self-righteous (I have a few specific characters in mind here) people would ever admit. I’m going into this with both eyes open. Should Trump win, it may not end up being a situation where the positives outweigh the negatives. But with Clinton, there’s no question in my mind which way it will go. It will be a flippin’ disaster.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  279. There is some measure of grace in the Clintons. There is none in the Trumps. Maybe Mike Spence will bring it in the next three and a half months.

    nk

    I don’t recall Hillary accusing Bernie Sanders’s wife of being ugly, smearing Lincoln Chaffee’s dad as a rapist, or comparing Elizabeth Warren to a child molester.

    Funny how, after all the dust has settled, Hillary isn’t trying to get her convention to boo Sanders. She would be such an idiot to do that, huh. She won and he lost, so it costs her nothing to be magnanimous about it, even congratulating him for being runner up. Hillary bashing Sanders today would be a bad sign for how she would handle foreign policy. I’d hate to bet the lives of our million + strong military on the whims of a childish egomaniac.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  280. Case in point.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  281. Especially one that is ready to hand over to Putin whatever part of Europe Putin decides he wants.

    kishnevi (871225)

  282. Ace is a place where teh thoughtful people go.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  283. Hillary and Trump pose different kinds of threats to the nation, in my view. But they both peg my “threat” needle.

    That’s not true of everyone, and if it’s not true of you, Col. H, I respect that decision and won’t try to talk you out of it one bit.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  284. Col. H:
    I am sure you can understand that some of us see many more negatives and far fewer positives in Trump than you do.
    For instance, that speech indicates he thinks prosecutors like Patterico should be federal subordinates trying murderers in federal court. Or maybe he doesn’t understand the concept that most government functions should be state and local. Or maybe he doesn’t care and just made another empty promise to sucker in the law and order vote….

    kishnevi (871225)

  285. It’s more than that.

    Hillary’s tool is compassion. She uses it cynically, hypocritically, manipulatively, fraudulently, possibly criminally with her phony foundation, but just that she uses it shows that she values it.

    Trump’s tool is anger (not to say resentment, hate, fear and prejudice).

    I do not plan to vote for either, but I could live better with a government of misdirected compassion than I could with a government of anger.

    nk (dbc370)

  286. Ace doesn’t get to lecture me on my integrity. Nor does anyone else. I decide that.

    Beldar

    Just google those articles Ace wrote about Brett Kimberlin. They are where his integrity is. I’d recommend asking him about this on his blog but you would probably be banned there. A coward dies many deaths, Ace said, when he first started talking about Kimberlin. I think that’s why he’s a sellout now. This is just his job.

    I can see how Haiku would say I’m being self righteous here and elsewhere. I don’t intend to come across holier than thou, but hey, there’s right and there’s wrong and I don’t want to mince words about it. Trump is a terrible man and this country can do better. Even with Hillary as the alternative I think they can do better than Trump.

    Ace thinks I’m responsible for Hillary. No s*&^ sherlock… I’m probably going to vote for her to stop Trump. I’m openly saying Trump is more dangerous. Blame blame blame away if that makes some of you feel… well, self righteous. I’m proud to stop Trump.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  287. The thing with Trump is every day he keeps piling up reasons to dislike him, not trust him, and wish he would just go away.
    He doesn’t seem to be trying very hard to win votes.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  288. It’s a suckfest, true enough. I just think the Clintons – both of them – are the lowest of the low. Criminal grifters. Always have been. Always will be.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  289. stopping Trump won’t help harvardtrash ted

    boyfriend is done

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  290. The thing is, colonel, Trump seems to daily try to see just how close he can get to them.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  291. Case in point.

    Colonel Haiku

    Yeah, a large portion (majority?) of your comments seem to reference me, many insultingly so. You’re incredibly judgey of different points of view. You take the worst possible interpretation of everything I say and make sure to remind everyone that I’m a humorless, anal, awful guy, multiple times, every day.

    It’s not my fault Trump has made this election about character, but that’s the big issue with him. I can’t really talk about him without saying he’s a bad person, because it’s the elephant in the room if I don’t.

    I would much rather talk about the deficit. That’s my top priority, but neither candidate would do a damn thing about it.

    I’ve had a few days off and enjoyed commenting here, but clearly you’re really worked up that I’m hanging around. I suggest you just ignore me if it’s such a big problem for you.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  292. Ted Cruz, yesterday:

    And to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. Stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.

    242. Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/21/2016 @ 5:02 pm

    Sammy, here’s my interpretation:

    Republicans, do show up and vote, even if you’re not happy with the nominee.

    That’s right. That was the first sentence.

    Vote because of all the downticket races.

    Ted Cruz threw in “up” too. And he didn’t say “because” or emphasize the downballot races. Now maybe he thought it looked better that way.

    and vote your conscience for president, one way or the other. Hillary or Trump or third party or not at all.

    No – not “not at all” It could be interpreted to mean that if you don’t find any good candidate in some race, leave that race out.

    But it also means:

    DON’T VOTE FOR THE LESSER of the TWO EVILS! Vote for the best candidate, or onl;y vote f there;s a good candidate.

    Since that’s Trump’s strongest argument, it hirts him, except among those people who would otherwise vote Republican who are considering voting for Hillary Clinton.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  293. Kishvevi

    I can’t wait to tell my son he’s going to be earning his CIB in Estonia.

    You can see Russia from there doncha know?

    Pinandpuller (0845e7)

  294. I’ll defend my spouse… but I also KNOW I signed up for a bare knuckles, no holds bar brawl and now that I lost, I want to cry foul?

    Nope. Not how it works. If you hold a grudge due to the disrespect of your wife, next time you train up to beat the living hell out of your opponent and send he or she to the “hospital”.

    In my opinion, Trump punched back at a Cruz SuperPac ad involving Melania and knocked them out.
    I do not endorse dragging spouses and cousins etc under the microscope, but sometime you lose the battle of optics. Melania was dished by a Cruz PAC in a seductive pose… Americans overwhelmingly “voted” for her over Heidi Cruz.

    Cruz should be made at whoever in whatever PAC brought it up, because whern Trump counter punched, he hurt Heidi, and he hurt Cruz.
    Never give a counter puncher that 20 lane freeway of an opening, and then don’t cry and pretend this is about honor. It is about your PAC brought in family, Trump went nuclear, and you lost.

    I still would like to see Cruz on the Supreme Court

    steveg (fed1c9)

  295. We all have our failings, Dustin. I have a big yapper, I can be overbearing – no, really, it’s true – and I’m overly fond of writing tedious, dumbass song parodies.

    I think most of us here would’ve been much happier campers if Ted Cruz had won the nomination.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  296. No – not “not at all” It could be interpreted to mean that if you don’t find any good candidate in some race, leave that race out.

    That’s what I meant. Show up to the ballot, but if you leave some blank that’s OK. BTW, I almost always do this because there are some races on my crowded ballot I just don’t have an intelligent opinion about (haiku should chime in and say there are no races I have an intelligent opinion about). I try really hard to know more, and I think the solution is to allow us to use our smartphones while we vote to do a little research. Hell, ideally we could see a little electronic platform and resume for each candidate while we vote with a paper ballot. I guess that’s too much for Rio Linda.

    DON’T VOTE FOR THE LESSER of the TWO EVILS! Vote for the best candidate, or onl;y vote f there;s a good candidate.

    Since that’s Trump’s strongest argument, it hirts him,

    Yeah, I agree it hurts him. I personally have serious fears about what Trump would do. Serious enough that just letting him slide without voting against him is difficult for me. Others will not vote at all, and Cruz resonates with a lot of us. Most here would agree that it’s important to still show up and vote where you can.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  297. We all have our failings, Dustin. I have a big yapper, I can be overbearing – no, really, it’s true – and I’m overly fond of writing tedious, dumbass song parodies.

    I think most of us here would’ve been much happier campers if Ted Cruz had won the nomination.

    Colonel Haiku

    Yes sir. We both agree on that.

    I actually like your song parodies! And I know my comments are lengthy and probably too frequent on the few days I’m actually commenting. Just ignore it if it’s ticking you off. Don’t let it get under your skin… it’s not intended to.

    Whether Hillary or Trump wins, our country is going to have a difficult future. Unfortunate, but there are other good things going on in the world if you look for them.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  298. Should read:

    “Cruz should be mad”

    Also, Cruz got a knockout counterpunch out of nowhere and lost to a celebrity TV star.
    Obviously Cruz is incapable of leading us, if he loses to some clown show.

    Dear God, please let Texas secede so we can see if Cruz can run a lemonade stand (Texans will thrive regardless). Right now it looks like he can’t even follow Phil Robertson Of Duck Dynasty and forgive.
    Forgiveness is a core principle of Cruz’ stance if he is truly evangelical. Right now Cruz is letting the personal interfere with his God talks to me stuff… because in my view Cruz is not holding to principle as tightly he is holding on to grudge

    steveg (fed1c9)

  299. Trump throwin’ down!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  300. “Death terrorism destruction and weakness”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  301. In my opinion, Trump punched back at a Cruz SuperPac ad involving Melania and knocked them out.
    I do not endorse dragging spouses and cousins etc under the microscope, but sometime you lose the battle of optics. Melania was dished by a Cruz PAC in a seductive pose… Americans overwhelmingly “voted” for her over Heidi Cruz.

    Fox News said they were a pro-cruz pac, but they weren’t. Greta Van Susteren had to retract the claim later in her show, admitting ‘they aren’t Ted Cruz’. Fox News was terrible this year.

    Cruz denounced that PAC the same night that ad came out. There was zero overlap between Cruz’s organization and ‘Make America Awesome’. Trump had just as much affiliation as Cruz did with “make america awesome”, which is zero. There was never any basis whatsoever to say Cruz was responsible for that ad. Trump just decided to start saying he was behind it, while saying ‘lyin ted’ every six seconds to muddy the waters over all the lying Trump was doing.

    Trump actively and personally attacked Cruz’s wife. Cruz condemned a third party’s attack on Trump. Your attempt to say they did the same thing, or this was tit for tat, is 100% BS.

    While you’re saying Trump won the exchange, please bear in mind that Trump cannot beat Hillary without a vast majority of Cruz’s loyal voters. You lying about what happened only cements my views.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  302. Ummmm,
    I think it was decided that Cruz had nothing to do with the Melania thing,
    the claim was Trump shooting off his mouth.

    I disagree with you, steveg. I thought we were supposed to be tired of the dc political class playing games and wanted people that were willing to mean what they said and took a stand.

    One moment Trump is talking about how independent he is,
    the next moment how he will make great deals with everyone,
    even Iran, on the basis of what Obama has “accomplished”.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  303. “In my opinion, Trump punched back at a Cruz SuperPac ad involving Melania and knocked them out.

    Trump lied about the PAC being tied to Cruz and all the little Trumpkins are still repeating the lie.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  304. Also, Cruz got a knockout counterpunch out of nowhere and lost to a celebrity TV star.
    Obviously Cruz is incapable of leading us, if he loses to some clown show.

    Spikin’ that football like you’ve never seen the end zone before. A lot like Obama, you Trump fans.

    Right now it looks like he can’t even follow Phil Robertson Of Duck Dynasty and forgive.

    That’s another reality show, isn’t it. You watch a lot of TV. Donald Trump for president, brought to you by Carl’s Jr.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  305. Let me ask you Trumpkins: How much respect do you have for Chris Christie? You don’t have to tell me. Just tell yourselves.

    nk (dbc370)

  306. It’s just too much of a risk to vote for Trump.

    If elected, and if he turns out to be a complete crazy man, Trump can be removed, either by impeachment, Amendment 25, or some less regular method. In Hillary’s case, we know that she would DO all those things we fear about Trump, and do them with greater effect through better organization. But we we also know that only Republicans can be impeached as Democrats don’t give a damn about anything in the Constitution except abortion rights.

    Trump, if terrible, is temporary. Hillary, certainly terrible, is less so.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  307. Kevin, that’s actually a damn good point I’ll have to chew on for a while. Pence has got to be loving his position these days. If Trump wins and acts decently, he looks fine. If Trump continues braying like a donkey, Pence looks presidential by comparison. If Trump loses Pence is reasonably conservative but has inroads to these Trump nuts. If Trump wins Pence is basically encouragement for impeachment, unlike the great Cheney or the moronic Biden.

    I disagree that Hillary would do all the things I fear in Trump. There really are worse things than a corrupt democrat. My life hasn’t really been that bad for the past 7 years. I actually think I’m lucky to be an American, still. We should do a lot better than that, but we can do a lot worse.

    What happens if you have a truly lawless president? Not just Obama, running rough over the other branches, sicing the IRS in secret, but truly lawless, empowered by bigotry and fear. Maybe I’m just being dramatic, but I have a hard time seeing Trump in office and not becoming pretty monstrous.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  308. There is a better counter argument to the two-value choice. If you vote for someone with a position, you indicate you like that position and want more people running of the same persuasion. Voting for a third party is based ENTIRELY on that premise — stating to the major parties that their offerings are unacceptable, and why. This is better than simply not voting, assuming that you can find a third-party candidate that reflects your objections adequately.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  309. What happens if you have a truly lawless president? Not just Obama, running rough over the other branches, sicing the IRS in secret, but truly lawless, empowered by bigotry and fear. Maybe I’m just being dramatic, but I have a hard time seeing Trump in office and not becoming pretty monstrous.

    Well, the press wouldn’t cover for him, for one thing. There are an awful lot of guns in the country, for another.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  310. However, this is Donald Trump’s convention, and everybody knows it.

    No, it isn’t, and it’s important that someone asserts that point.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  311. Well, the press wouldn’t cover for him, for one thing. There are an awful lot of guns in the country, for another.

    Kevin M

    Also true points. I don’t think Trump could be the next Stalin or Hitler, thanks to the internet and a people who are simply stronger and more independent than any other nation has ever had. Though we’re weaker than we were a few years ago, and the press isn’t quite as free.

    —-

    Can we at least change the ballots to

    [ ] Not Clinton
    [ ] Not Trump

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  312. ‘vote your conscience’

    I read that the next morning to my non-political wife. We didn’t watch the convention on TV, and didn’t even know what Cruz said until the next day. But from catching tidbits of the news she knew that ‘vote your conscience’ was what the nevertrumpers were saying in trying to overturn the results of the primaries when Trump won the majority 1500+ delegates.

    Nobody told her to “boo” Cruz.

    But when I read Cruz’s entire paragraph to her, when I got to that phrase, her jaw dropped and she said, “That son of a bitch.”

    She knew exactly what Cruz was saying — don’t vote for Trump. And she didn’t like it one bit.

    You Cruz & anti-Trump guys can play lawyerly word games all you want, but out here in the real world people know EXACTLY what Cruz was saying and doing. Came to HIS party’s convention and pee on the floor because he didn’t win.

    And the pledge wasn’t to Trump. The pledge was to the party, and the Repub voters, to support the nominee.

    fred-2 (253d03)

  313. @306 nk

    Tell us, how much respect are we supposed to have for Chris Christie, and why?

    Pinandpuller (928ad9)

  314. Dustin,

    Your life has been good for the past 7 years?
    That’s awesome for you, man.
    But you do acknowledge there’s a lot of people hurting in this country — and they’re not lying about it, right?
    Barack will be the first President to not deliver 3% growth.
    In addition, the world is on fire.
    … and we can’t afford another four years of Democrats in control of the IRS, DoJ, the VA, or the EPA.

    When the Titanic is sinking, let’s not have academic arguments about the arrangement of the deck chairs.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  315. It’s not a debate. Just something to think about. Or not.

    nk (dbc370)

  316. Dustin

    Please don’t drag this into whose endzone spike means more.
    Or at least tell me:
    1: Why you think this is an endzone spike? The win or loss is already settled, there is no time left to recover. I can’t help it if you’ve got no game right now… all I did was walk into the endzone and hand the ball to the referee. I was a walk on sub… didn’t want to score, but no one tackled me… that is not a spike… and so what if it was?
    Your guy lost in a competition and sometimes emotions result in a spike. It is often said that when entering the end zone, you should act like this is a place you are accustomed to.
    Sometimes losing results in crying supporters. Never experienced this personally, so it is great to learn more by seeing it played out here

    I think as far as Cruz goes, that right now, there is no need to spike the ball when scoring yet another time against him… although I am sure Cruz can quote every word of the rule book and argue over every word (like “abrogate”) ad nauseum as to why the spike is illegal and also morally wrong

    Yes. DD is a reality show… popular with religious conservatives of the stripe that usually fall in line behind Cruz or I would not have brought it up.
    I rarely watch TV. Nice job Nostradamus on telling me what I watch. Dunce. You live in your own fevered swamp of a mind. I do not watch TV much if at all… and almost never live. You straw manned me with “You watch a lot of TV” but I rarely watch the news, and do not watch DD, so don’t spew BS like this.
    Is the word DUNCE OK when dealing with presumptive idiocy or can I please be banned?

    Former viable Candidate Cruz that still has national aspirations lost a bare knuckles brawl and now whines… good luck in 2020, 2024, 2028 because the Dems now know Cruz can’t handle a bare knuckles fight… sure he’ll win the legal mumbo jumbo fight and “best vocabulary in a losing effort”, but he won’t win the Presidency.

    By the way. How about this idea: Cruz is not defending the honor of his wife… he is hiding behind her skirt because he is petulant because he lost and now wants to… on “principle”… stand on the insult to his wife.
    God knows Cruz lost on every other lawyers gambit, and this could be nothing but another lawyers BS excuse wrapped in flowery language pandering to a Texas audience. Trump “abrogated”… blah blah blah and as if Trump would not have been able to weasel the same excuse over some “abrogation”.
    Cruz insulted the Texas audience by acting as if this was a point of honor, rather than a point of wounded pride

    When someone owns a brace of dunce hats and then trots out in one, wraps me up in a strawman, is it ok to notice, or am I required by rules of the site to go PC and kumbaya?

    steveg (fed1c9)

  317. We need to take the discussion out one level of abstraction. We need to fix our primaries. Why did Trump fight changing the primary rules so that democrats can’t vote in GOP primaries?

    Primary election laws are set by the state government, not the parties.

    This is not true. State governments do not have the power to dictate to political parties how to choose their candidates. State laws that govern primaries are drawn up by the parties, and then entrenched in law; they’re only valid for so long as the parties consent.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  318. The pledge was to the party, and the Repub voters, to support the nominee.

    A nominee who was not supported by either living GOP ex-President, nor several of the other contenders. Cruz, (and perhaps both Bushes) had reason, due to scurrilous and baseless attacks.

    The one I can’t figure out is Kasich, the spoiler who gave the nomination to Trump coming out in such bitter opposition. Was he promised the VP job and then stiffed?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  319. fred-2 at 312, you’ve made me very happy. Patterico said that it was a “F*** you” to Trump but I’m glad to hear that’s how it played in Peoria too.

    nk (dbc370)

  320. FLASHBACK: Ted Cruz PROMISES to Endorse Donald Trump on National TV (VIDEO)

    That was on March 3. On March 29, Trump renounced the pledge, and with that he released Cruz from its provisions. As of that day Cruz had no obligation to endorse Trump, and to pretend he did is dishonest. Everyone who pretends that Cruz was still bound by that pledge is a damned liar, and should be exposed as such. That Jim Hoft is such a liar should surprise nobody.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  321. Patterico, this is the best piece I’ve read in a long time. You are 100% right in your assessment of Cruz. I was impressed with Cruz and hope he runs again. Perhaps by the time 2020 rolls around people will have awakened and be sick of Trump and Hillary. Cruz has integrity and stands up for principle, something Americans have lost. I’m ready to leave the republican party, not to become a democrat, however. Liberals have zero integrity. But now I see that republicans are not much different, except ones like Cruz. I wish we had more men and women of integrity and principle like Cruz.

    PursueJustice (93dd0f)

  322. Ted Cruz’s ego and ambition put his family in that white spot light.

    I’m sure a guy as well read as he is familiar with Nancy Reagan, Kitty Dukkakis, Betty Ford et al.

    I’m not saying all’s fair but quit acting shocked.

    And Michael Smith and his colleagues put themselves in the line of fire that terrible day in Dallas, when they went out to do their duty. They knew there was a danger, and yet they didn’t shirk their duty and cower under their beds, and therefore we should quit acting shocked at what happened to them. Right? That is what you mean, isn’t it? Or what?

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  323. Kaisich did the right thing. Cruz betrayed himself as a person with no class at all. That’s a shame. He (seems to be/is) a good man with good ideals.

    To the extent that either of them were in there pitching to force Trump to sign the loyalty pledge they are people with no more sense of honor than Hillary or Bill or Obama.

    {^_^}

    JDow (199dc0)

  324. Now that this principled, “vote your conscience” speech by Mr. Cruz has taken place, his political career as a Repub is probably over. I doubt he will be reelected by Texans in 2020. Staying on a straight and narrow principled course, while a semi is swerving head-on at you because you have the right of way, is suicide if not stupid. Cruz wasn’t going to win. His message did not resonate with enough voters. If Trump didn’t beat him it would have been Jeb! or another elite establishment candidate. Mr. Trump changed the dynamic of the campaign entirely.

    fgm (f1de5d)

  325. Steveg, thanks for replying. I don’t mean to be rude but your comment was a little tough to follow.

    How about this idea: Cruz is not defending the honor of his wife… he is hiding behind her skirt because he is petulant because he lost and now wants to… on “principle”… stand on the insult to his wife.

    You’re just being a dick, I guess. Rambling junior high stuff. Trump’s your man, and you’ve got his back, bro.

    Cruz Supporter,

    Your life has been good for the past 7 years?
    That’s awesome for you, man.

    Thanks. Hard work and patience finally got me where I always wanted to be. You are so lucky to be in America, a country that is already great. There are many problems out there, but if you bust your ass you can make it here. You may not get to marry Melania models every ten years, but you can be very happy in America today.

    I am sure you would be telling me to vote for Hillary, not Trump, if the partisanship were reversed. Trump is the proof that destroys so many partisan’s credibility.

    You’re telling me that the nation cannot survive another four years. You die hard partisans told me that four years ago and you were full of crap. You told me that eight years ago and you were full of crap. Fear is an exploitative argument. It is designed to shut the conversation down.

    Barack will be the first President to not deliver 3% growth.

    Of course it’s the legislature that spends all the ridiculous money it’s spending. The GOP has been atrocious as stewards of the purse. They increased domestic spending enormously, even when they controlled the white house and both houses of congress. The weight of the GOP’s spending is terrible. The weight of democrat spending would probably be worse, but right now, the GOP runs the house and you can’t just blame Obama for everything. There are many factors to our economy, and the government’s main impact is the sheer ridiculous size of our government, which necessitates terrible taxation and debt and unfunded liabilities.

    What is Trump going to do to fix this? You tell me we’re on the Titanic, meaning we are going to DIE, and the solution is Trump, who promises so many huge government programs, pandering to every possible group in his huge speech. How does this not simply turning on all the faucets on the Titanic?

    You completely misunderstand your deck chairs metaphor, which you seem to use every day. It’s YOU who are shuffling around useless details, Big Gov democrat versus Big Gov RINO, that will do nothing about the real problem: Big Government. What about my comments amounts to rearranging deck chairs? What minor detail and I advocating to fix, while ignoring the big picture? Yes, spending is an existential threat to the republic, but when has the GOP fought spending? The 1990s. When they were invigorated by two things: opposing a Clinton administration and keeping together a fracture Ross Perot exposed.

    That’s why I say Hillary is terrible, but the GOP would be better opposing her than being led by Trump.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  326. I doubt he will be reelected by Texans in 2020.

    hahahahaha

    I can guarantee he won’t, Carnac the Magnificent!

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  327. In my opinion, Trump punched back at a Cruz SuperPac ad involving Melania and knocked them out. […] Melania was dished by a Cruz PAC in a seductive pose […] It is about your PAC brought in family

    You’re entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts; that is a factual claim, and it is a lie.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  328. Forgiveness is a core principle of Cruz’ stance if he is truly evangelical.

    Do evanglicals believe that one has the right to forgive wrongs done to another? And even if one had that right, would it not be a sin to forgive a wrong done to ones parent or spouse, whom one is obligated to honor?

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  329. If Trump wins Pence is basically encouragement for impeachment, unlike the great Cheney or the moronic Biden.

    I imagine Trump has already thought of that, and plans to fire Pence the moment he detects any disloyalty. Boy is he in for a surprise when he finds out he can’t do that. I’m quite sure he doesn’t know it yet.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  330. Do evanglicals believe that one has the right to forgive wrongs done to another? And even if one had that right, would it not be a sin to forgive a wrong done to ones parent or spouse, whom one is obligated to honor?

    Milhouse

    No of course not.

    Boy is he in for a surprise when he finds out he can’t do that. I’m quite sure he doesn’t know it yet.

    I guess he would just find a way to fire him anyway. This is the great tragedy. Obama removed so many protections the founders put in place. Now comes a guy who simply must not govern without those protections. What happens when Trump orders the military to remove people from offices they hold?

    It would take a while to line up enough yes men, hopefully the nation is so saturated in honor it couldn’t happen here. But I don’t know…

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  331. Of course it’s the legislature that spends all the ridiculous money it’s spending. The GOP has been atrocious as stewards of the purse. […] right now, the GOP runs the house and you can’t just blame Obama for everything.

    If you want to get technical, the legislature appropriates the money, the president spends it. If you want to stay realistic, then it isn’t the legislature that decides how much is spent, it’s negotiations between the two houses and the president, negotiations in which the Democrats always hold the trump card no matter which side they’re playing. The Republican House has tried passing leaner appropriations. First the Ds block them in the senate, and if that fails then the president vetoes them. To get something past the senate and the president it has to have the goodies they insist on.

    And when the roles are reversed it works exactly in reverse. If a D president vetoes a R congress’s appropriations for being too lean, as happened in 1995, it’s the congress’s fault. If a R president vetoes a D congress’s appropriations for being too fat, as happened in 1987, it’s the president’s fault. There’s no winning the game. You have to pass something or the government shuts down and the Ds win. So you have to give them whatever they’re willing to go nuclear on.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  332. I guess he would just find a way to fire him anyway.

    He can’t. No matter what he does, Pence would remain the VP.

    What happens when Trump orders the military to remove people from offices they hold?

    1. They wouldn’t obey. But 2. even if they wanted to, they can’t. What does it mean to remove someone from an office? Physically pick them up from their desks and carry them outside? The vice presidency isn’t an office in that sense; the office is invested in the person, and accompanies him wherever he goes. If he were to flee to China he’d still be vice president — and, if Trump were removed, president. It would just happen automatically, so there’s no way the mlitary could stop it.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  333. Milhouse,

    You are certainly right in the legal sense. But then, a number of things that just aren’t so, have been made so, little by little, by judges and bureacrats. Hope I don’t sound too paranoid.

    the Democrats always hold the trump card no matter which side they’re playing.

    Well, they definitely win no matter which side they are playing. Even when the GOP held both houses and the exec branch our spending exploded. The GOP’s last significant contribution was getting rid of the debt ceiling altogether, because they were tired of losing the fight over it every time.

    So, with that in mind, I am not exactly impressed with the argument that I need to be a loyal republican or else spending.

    You have to pass something or the government shuts down and the Ds win. So you have to give them whatever they’re willing to go nuclear on.

    I just feel like we could win that if we had the willpower. Particularly when it comes to consequences. Make sure the Hill staff do not get back pay, ever. Hell, no pay or backpay for anybody except the troops and a few essential personnel beyond. The GOP gives up on this stuff so fast. I recognize Trump as a lefty hustler taking advantage of this issue, but I damn sure understand why the voters are sick of the GOP establishment. They sure got good at losing.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  334. Millhouse

    So do you equate someone being memed on the internet with a cop being shot in the back and murdered? Do you equate Trump with a merciless killer?

    That is what you mean, right?

    Or what?

    Pinandpuller (0845e7)

  335. forgiveness is to give it forward to God, realize the problem is bigger than you, unburden yourself.
    it doesn’t mean you give your home to the three time felon who raped and killed your daughter… it means you give them to God and let Him judge… harshly or not.
    It also means you trust God to be just and are ok with whatever happens.
    then you can let it go, be happy and move on in life. The whole thing belongs to God.

    For all his religious bent, it seems Cruz is not yet at the point of giving the slight against Heidi to God and then moving on

    steveg (fed1c9)

  336. Steveg, you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. Being a Christian does not mean being every anti-Christian’s (such as Donald Trump) doormat. Even Jesus told his inner core disciples to arm themselves with the state-of-the-art weapons of the day.

    John Hitchcock (6325dc)

  337. Beldar and Dustin,

    I think the GOP will ask Rick Perry to primary Cruz in 2018, and he might do it because he’s still relatively young and obviously wants to go to Washington. Perry would be much more willing to follow the Beltway Party line than Cruz, so there will be plenty of GOP money to help him. In addition, here at home, many Texas GOP county chairmen who like Perry are mad at Cruz bease he refused to endorse Trump. It would be a test of which vision will lead Texas in the future, and I’m not sure who would win.

    DRJ (15874d)

  338. Ted who?

    Big money donors have crossed Cruz off the list.

    mg (31009b)

  339. DRJ, that’s an interesting possibility. Do you think it’s more likely, or less likely, if Trump loses?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  340. Puller, it’s exactly the same principle. You blame the victim for the evil people do to those who do their duty.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  341. The lust for power corrupts,
    Cruz does what once would have been the expected norm,
    and rightly so,
    and people who have been complaining about Obama’s pettiness for 7+ years
    are all in when it is Trump.

    Trump could have worked to unite the party with what Cruz gave him,
    but instead he played Game of thrones to make an example of what happens to those who do not bow and kiss his ring and give thanks for letting them live.

    And as disgusting and revolting as Trump is,
    Clinton is worse.

    Step back a moment and observe who the American public has chosen as the two candidates for president,
    it is very sad,
    and should be frightening.
    When everyone lies to their brother and sister,
    it is an evil time.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  342. Beldar asked me, well above:

    @ Realistic Dana (#163): Did you say the same things about Reagan in 1976, I wonder?

    Given that I was 23 in 1976, and I’m 63 now, it would be fair to say that my judgements have changed. Nevertheless, no one, certainly not I, would have said that Ronald Reagan had the charisma of a wet paper bag and that more people disliked him than liked him.

    The coldly realistic Dana (f6a568)

  343. @ 17

    If you don’t vote for Trump then you’re helping Klinton. Period.

    I am not voting for Trump. Therefore, according to you, I am helping Clinton. I am also not voting for Clinton. Therefore, by an application of your same principle, I am helping Trump.

    So somehow, by not voting for either, I am helping both.

    This is a very unique kind of logic you’ve developed.

    Demosthenes (09f714)

  344. @ 311

    Can we at least change the ballots to

    [ ] Not Clinton
    [ ] Not Trump

    Only if the ballots are also changed to read “choose as many as you like.” :)

    @ 312

    You Cruz & anti-Trump guys can play lawyerly word games all you want, but out here in the real world people know EXACTLY what Cruz was saying and doing. Came to HIS party’s convention and pee on the floor because he didn’t win.

    I think it was fairly generous of Cruz not to formally oppose a man who insulted his wife and smeared (by implication) his father. He gave Trump everything the man was owed.

    Demosthenes (09f714)

  345. What Demo said.

    Steve Malynn (4bc33a)

  346. Third the motion.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  347. DRJ,

    That’s a fascinating theory and I have to admit it concerns me as the bias against Cruz is so great, particularly locally, that I think Perry would have a shot. Perry has a great resume, but there’s no question in my mind Cruz is a rare principled leader and the better representative in the Senate.

    Can’t say I’m not getting used to disappointment from politics.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  348. Beldar,

    I think the GOP will plan for someone to primary Cruz, whether or not Trump wins — but I also think the GOPe is behind the sandbagging of Cruz at the convention. This has the mark of the establishment trying to damage their most hated adversary, Cruz, and Trump let them because he’s a showman and because he needs the GOP more than they need him.

    The question is who will agree to run against Cruz. Not many wanted to be Dewhurst 2.0 before, but someone will now that Cruz is damaged from a bruising campaign. Perry is smart when it comes to political decisions in Texas and he won’t run if Cruz looks unbeatable, but I think this makes it more likely Perry will decide Cruz can be beaten. Perry has the likability and plain-spoken manner that Cruz lacks and that plays well in Texas. In addition, Perry will have national financial backing and leaders willing to endorse him and criticize Cruz.

    Those are formidable advantages that Perry knows how to use, but I don’t know what he will do or whether Trump’s future will affect his decision. I don’t think it matters. Texans know Perry and will remember him fondly. The issue will be Cruz, not Trump, and Cruz needs to mend fences in Texas pronto. His speech at the Texas delegation suggests to me that he knows it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  349. I feel the same way about Cruz and politics, Dustin.

    DRJ (15874d)

  350. Of course, this could have been Trump’s idea. Trump likes to get even by hurting people who oppose him. Casual dishonesty and cruelty are hallmarks of narcissists.

    DRJ (15874d)

  351. I hope Cruz decides to represent Texas by taking public stands on basic principles, in being a public spokesman for legislation he believes in and against legislation he opposes. He should quit trying to play Senate games behind the scenes. I know it’s tempting because that’s how the Senate gets things done, and not playing the game means Cruz will never get legislation passed. But I think his future lies in being the voice of the opposition.

    Unfortunately, I doubt Texas businesses will be happy with that, and I don’t blame them. They need powerful representatives in Washington to represent their and the State’s interests. There’s a reason we rarely have a real-life Mr. Smith go to Washington, let alone successfully stay there.

    DRJ (15874d)

  352. While one aspect (energy) of Texas “business” will be taken care of in a Trump administration, how will the “business” dependent on NAFTA and non Big3 auto manufacture fare? That cant wait on a Perry coming in by January 2019. In the interim, Texas could take quite a haircut due to protectionist policies.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  353. I think Trump has scared Hillary about losses of the black vote, note a new #3 contender for VP:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/07/22/sources-clinton-to-make-vp-call-friday-kaine-vilsack-booker-on-short-list.html

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  354. Go get ’em, Ted,
    Expose all of the BS front and center.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  355. Roger Stone and Alex Jones? It is fruitcake season. Will they draft David Duke?

    nk (dbc370)

  356. Roger Stone is the real life Stamper from House of Cards, the establishment has not been particularly effective, else Kay Bailey and David Dewhurst would have been the office holders,

    narciso (732bc0)

  357. Today’s edition of Every word Trump says is a lie:

    I don’t have a transcript but these are the highlights. Ted Cruz violated campaign finance laws. The National Enquirer is highly credible. No one has ever denied that Ted Cruz’s father shot JFK. Ted Cruz’s PAC attacked Melania Trump. Melania Trump didn’t marry Donald for money because she made a lot of money lolling around naked. Ted Cruz changed his speech. Trump doesn’t want Ted Cruz’s endorsement and wouldn’t accept it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  358. Heh!

    nk (dbc370)

  359. Dustin, you’re simply wrong about a few things. Many a runner up has been denied a platform at the winners convention. Trump would have been well within his rights and precedent to have forced an ‘endorsement, or no speaking slot’ position. Trump was magnanimous in not extracting that promise…because he expected Cruz to do the right thing at his party convention.

    You keep saying Trump with respect to the booing of Cruz. Trump didn’t boo Cruz, at least not that I saw, and I am pretty sure it would have led the evening news if he did. The delegates to the Republican party convention booed Cruz.

    “I hear no disunity in the speech.”
    If you really didn’t hear it, you’re the only one, and not qualified to have an opinion. Everyone else noticed it, and called it out with booing in real time. If you didn’t hear it, you need to adjust your ideological blinders.

    “(again, why is this democrat entitled to my support?)”

    If you’re a Republican, because he won your party’s highly contested but now resolved nomination process. If you’re not a Republican, you’re way too far up in Republican’s internal business and not entitled to a position. If you’re an American, because Trump is the only alternative outcome to Clinton.

    noway (2640f4)

  360. ^ wow

    what more can I say

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  361. Trump has said he doesn’t need or want conservatives who voted for Cruz,
    the RNC back stabbed Cruz

    We can take a hint
    If trump doesn’t want us,
    we will oblige.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  362. noway, “not qualified to hold a position” ? You are a clown.

    Speaking of clowns, Trump is still signalling the con:
    http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/trump-pivots-to-the-general-election-by-questioning-whether-cruzs-dad-killed-jfk-again/

    SPQR (a3a747)

  363. because he expected Cruz to do the right thing at his party convention

    And Cruz did the right thing; if you think Trump represents your values, vote for Trump. If you think he doesn’t, don’t.

    And Trump is not an alternative outcome to Clinton. He’s Clinton with male genitals, a loud voice, and no coherent policy ideas. Voting for the lesser of two demons is still voting for a demon.

    kishnevi (870883)

  364. Refusing to endorse Trump will hurt Cruz with some and help him with others:

    Katie Packer, a Republican strategist who founded Our Principles PAC in a vain attempt to stop the Trump nomination, called the Cruz speech a “Rorschach test” that will reverberate into future contests.

    “If you can’t stand Trump, like me, you saw it as bold,” she said. “If you love Trump, you saw it as a betrayal. If you don’t like Trump but have been cowed or fallen in line, you saw it as self-serving, because you need that to feel better about your own weakness.”

    “I think he will be a force to be reckoned with in 2020.”

    Cruz is being trashed and heralded today, no one knows what it will do because 4 years is an eternity in politics. But I know this: If unifying the GOP means trashing Cruz, Trump is in trouble.

    DRJ (15874d)

  365. The link heralding Cruz, separated to avoid the too-many-links filter.

    DRJ (15874d)

  366. narciso,

    Craig Shirley explained that Reagan did not endorse Ford, and the Miller Center says Reagan gave Ford “token support.” According to Salena Zito:

    In the 1976 presidential campaign, Gerald Ford blamed Ronald Reagan for his loss to Jimmy Carter because Reagan did not campaign for Ford in Southern Ohio and Western Pennsylvania. Ford felt Reagan could have made the difference among what came to be known as Reagan Democrats, the same voters with whom Obama cannot connect.

    DRJ (15874d)

  367. well here’s one example, is that a token

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2q9LjMxPcY

    could it be said that their advisors on both ends, were not as pig ignorant, as 40 years later,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbvIo9Lebrc&feature=youtu.be

    narciso (732bc0)

  368. Cruz kept faith with the Constitution and our traditional GOP values. An election, any election, is a one-time event. Your family is forever. If you can’t stand up for your family when they are attacked you fail in the trial of life.

    Ricardo (302763)

  369. you mean like the insinuation that trump’s father was with the klan, I really have hated this farking primary, have I made that clear, too many have lost their farking minds over it,

    narciso (732bc0)

  370. insinuation that trump’s father was with the klan

    I don’t remember that one. Mind you, since Trump was being charged with being a near member of the Klan himself, charging his father with that probably got lost in the shuffle.

    Speaking of the Klan, David Duke has decided to run for the US Senate.

    kishnevi (870883)

  371. narciso,

    Cruz supports anyone who supports the Constitution, just as your link shows that Reagan supported the GOP platform that he successfully put in place during the 1976 convention. Cruz gave Trump and his supporters the chance to step up and adopt the mantle of defenders of the Constitution, but they loudly refused. Reagan’s ad did the same thing by associating Ford with support for the GOP platform.

    As for family, show me where Cruz impugned Trump’s father/family the way Trump did repeatedly, including today. Actions like this serves Trump’s ego but not his campaign. He is a fearful, angry, mean man and his supporters are becoming more and more like him.

    DRJ (15874d)

  372. And, yes, that is token support.

    DRJ (15874d)

  373. they’ve both been acting stupidly, to cite general honore, roe and manafort and stewart and stone, have I covered all the bases,

    narciso (732bc0)

  374. With no endorsement, just like Cruz.

    DRJ (15874d)

  375. kishnevi,

    Duke knows voters will turn out for Trump in November. I bet he thinks they will like his white grievance message and vote for him, too.

    DRJ (15874d)

  376. his voter rolls were long sold first to the previous governor then blanco,

    narciso (732bc0)

  377. Mr. Trump’s so good how he understands the importance of family. His one is just lovely I think.

    They’re a beacon of hope in these dark times, and this is how you know Jesus still loves us.

    Almost had to brush a way a tear there. Definitely a very special time for America.

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  378. *away* i mean

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  379. Dustin, nothing to respond to ‘wow’ It is one thing to believe Cruz did the right thing…it is quite another, and dishonest, to pretend Cruz didn’t do what he did. And yes, everyone honest saw it, and saw it instantly, and those party delegates who saw it live and in person were booing.

    I can appreciate someone adopting ideological purity over party loyalty (like our host, or Cruz generally). A fine position, and most often my own. But no one can evade the consequences of that position, which is forsaking the claim to party loyalty when you need in 4 years later. I wish Cruz luck in shattering the Constitution Party platform’s 2012 0.09% performance in 2020, maybe even breaking through all the way to 0.5%!

    The time to be ideologically pure at the expense of the party loyalty is explicitly NOT at the party convention from the party stage. Given the bad blood, Cruz didn’t need to extol Trump personally, but he should have helped his supposed party at THAT forum, or stayed away like other former contenders. Cruz explicitly chose not to help the party he campaigned to have help him.

    Even something as simple as “We Republicans had a hard fought nomination cycle. It is over for 2016, and we look forward to re-engaging in the conversation in 2020. But first, we have to work together to beat Clinton.” Would have been infinitely preferable to the ‘vote your conscience’ shenanigans.

    When you people return to your homecoming football game, do you go on about the fine qualities of the opposing team?

    kishnevi:”Trump is not an alternative outcome to Clinton.”
    Trump is not only an alternative, as of several weeks ago, he is the only alternative. Who else do you think will sit in the oval office from 2017-2020? Cruz isn’t going to win a write in. Trump may possibly be a disaster, but even if so, he will be a very different flavored disaster than Clinton, and at a minimum he is not the guaranteed absolute certainty of a mega-disaster of Clinton. But Clinton and Trump are the potential winners. Those are the alternatives, no matter who wishes how hard there was another option. I have no objection to people deciding not to vote, or voting 3rd party, but two points. First, don’t advocate for that from the R (or D) convention platform, and second, you NeverTrumpers have to own the consequences of your de facto Clinton support.

    noway (2640f4)

  380. IngSoc took away my Certificate of Ideological Purity three Party purges ago. “Ideological purity” is a straw man you guys bring up when we mention that Trump lacks the character, intellect and morals to be a dog leave alone a dog-catcher.

    nk (dbc370)

  381. noway, Trump is as bad as Clinton. That is why he is no real alternative to her. I may be robbed and murdered but I don’t have to consent to being robbed and murdered. Your claim equates with saying I should consent.

    By your standard, we should always vote for the Republican candidate. No matter how awful the candidate might be.
    Which means your standard is wrong.

    kishnevi (57338f)

  382. Cruz was not the problem,
    Trump and the RNC’s planned response was.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  383. @ 382

    By your standard, we should always vote for the Republican candidate. No matter how awful the candidate might be.

    I don’t think they would universalize the principle. That would require having principles. It’s really all about Trump, you know. They’ll say things like “He won the most votes, and so he’s owed our support.” And if they meant just that, they’d be worth arguing with. What they really mean, though, is “There’s more of us than there are of you, so kneel before Zod.”

    Demosthenes (09f714)

  384. When it comes to these two, you have to try to ponder third and fourth order effects. It’s probably hard to get a good feel for that.

    Sammy Finkelman (372aad)

  385. @372; Hiya DRJ. He’s a New Yorker, where unlike Cruz, several herds of cattle really do come with his hat–and a helluva lot of fertilizer, too. But given how obviously horrid and weak the other candidate is, there’s a very real chance he can win. We’re deep into an era when Americans don’t want to be governed but wish to be entertained. Image over substance rules. And you can thank the Great Communicator and his team for getting that tape rolling in our times: Ronald Reagan and Mike Deaver.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  386. @ 380

    The time to be ideologically pure at the expense of the party loyalty is explicitly NOT at the party convention from the party stage.

    Well, what did you expect? Unlike many people here, I’m not a Cruz fan — though I would have voted for him if he had won the nomination, which I will not do for Trump. And he’s been putting his principles first for quite some time now. Why do you think so many of the top GOP brass went after Cruz, instead of Trump, when it became a two-man race? It was because HE HAD PISSED THEM OFF, and Trump hadn’t.

    So Wednesday night was vintage Cruz. If you expected anything else, then you either haven’t been paying any attention to him, or you’re the most naive Trump supporter on Earth…with no good excuse, since the text was public before the speech was given. And you know what? I’m proud of Cruz. As frustrated as I have been with him in the past (at times), he won some serious points with me by doing the right thing. And it was the right thing, to get up and give a voice to the 56% of Republican primary voters who didn’t vote for Trump, and the delegates they had elected who were parliamentary-procedured into oblivion against the party’s own rules. Further, Cruz’s voice was a very mild one. The only people who could be upset with innocuous “Vote your conscience” rhetoric are people who don’t have a conscience to begin with.

    When you people return to your homecoming football game, do you go on about the fine qualities of the opposing team?

    No one’s been praising Democrats here, so your analogy fails.

    I have no objection to people deciding not to vote, or voting 3rd party, but two points. First, don’t advocate for that from the R (or D) convention platform, and second, you NeverTrumpers have to own the consequences of your de facto Clinton support.

    Again, how am I supporting Clinton by not voting for Trump? I am also not voting for Clinton. Yet you clearly don’t think my non-vote for Clinton means that I am supporting Trump.

    Let me finish your work for you, since you have so conspicuously failed to show it. Your position only makes sense if you think that Clinton is the leader. If Trump were leading by several points, I bet you wouldn’t care nearly as much. You’d let us go, because you’d be much more confident that you wouldn’t need us to win. The trouble for you is that Trump himself has said he doesn’t need us. If you really believe he’s going to build a wall and enact mass deportations and do everything else he’s said he’s going to do (even though he’s already walked almost all of it back, and then reinstated some of it only to walk most of it back again), then why don’t you believe him about this?

    And again, I’ll tell you. Whether you can admit it or not, it’s because you don’t believe him any more than we do. You have basically said that you plan on voting for Trump because you’re certain Clinton will be a disaster, and you’re fairly sure Trump won’t be as much of a disaster. But what is your basis for that conclusion? I’m sure that the people in Eastern Europe were pretty damn happy they were out from under Hitler, thinking no one else would be as bad…and then they had to deal with Uncle Joe. So that reasoning doesn’t work out every time. If you don’t think you can believe Trump, what are you banking on?

    And I’ll tell you that, too, one more time. You’re banking that electing Trump is the equivalent of picking “C” as the answer to every question on a multiple-choice test. Just by sheer random chance and the laws of probability, you may well end up with a quarter of what you want. But then again, you may not. You might get more…or less. And you think that if enough of us follow your strategy, then your test won’t look as bad when the grade distribution curve comes out. But the problem with your argument is my belief that Trump’s nomination secured the election for Hillary already. So what chance does your argument have to move me? It doesn’t apply.

    Maybe this is a test you should have studied for.

    Demosthenes (09f714)

  387. You blame Reagan for turning politics into entertainment but I blame JFK. Remember Camelot? That’s pure theater, DCSCA.

    DRJ (15874d)

  388. Demonsthenes,

    Great comments. I hope you keep commenting in the future.

    DRJ (15874d)

  389. I may be robbed and murdered but I don’t have to consent to being robbed and murdered.

    kishnevi (57338f) — 7/22/2016 @ 2:52 pm

    What are you talking about?

    Gerald A (76f251)

  390. “Trump’s nomination secured the election for Hillary already.”

    It certainly did and beyond that – it provides the “purity” fodder to move the GOP leftward when the sniveling cowards without principles or conscience lay the blame for the disaster at the feet of those who refuse to participate in the charade. Those who absolutely refuse to vote for this amoral, unethical stinking pile of crap on the basis of conscience may extend his margin of defeat but they will not amount to enough to have affected the outcome.

    Rick Ballard (04482a)

  391. Gerald @380
    I was responding to the argument that we only have two choices (Donald and Hillary), and must choose between them.

    Which is false. It presumes that not only must we be victimized, but that we must consent to being victimized.
    If I am a victim, I still do not have to consent. I can at least object to the crime even if I can not stop it

    kishnevi (050eae)

  392. What is the nature of the “victimization” you anticipate under Trump kishnevi?

    Gerald A (76f251)

  393. kishveni, Trump is the alternative to Clinton. You can perceive them to be equally as bad, don’t vote, or vote 3rd party, and own it. Trump is largely an unknown, may be horrible, may be bad, may be OK. But I think any liberty (or Constitutionally) oriented individual would recognize Clinton as a guaranteed horrendously bad outcome…and Clinton expected case equals Trump worst case. Given how bad the Constitutional limits on government have been shredded, a Clinton admininstration with 2-3 Clinton Supreme court nominees would be all she wrote for liberty in this country. But broadly, yes, if you are a Republican, and a Cruz supporter you should prefer Trump over Clinton, if for no other reason that the people around them will be better. Even if you think Trump = Clinton, do you think Pence = whoever she picks? Do you think Clinton and Trump’s HUD secretary picks will be equal? Or to be even more current, do you think the Trump IRS director will be harassing everyone to the right of Mao, like the current admins has done, and would continue with impunity under Clinton?

    I am voting for the least bad outcome. If you are even loosely associated with the Republican party, you should too. If your not at least loosely affiliated with Republican party, the Republicans shouldn’t be listening to who you think they should nominate. I certainly don’t think the communist party will listen to my opinion about who they endorse.

    I struggle to understand how any Cruz supporter can perceive a Clinton admin as about the same as Republican administration with Trump at the top of the ticket.

    noway (2640f4)

  394. Trump has bad economic ideas, bad foreign policy ideas, is in love with the idea of a strong central government, and authoritarian. Plus he’s a narcissist with no integrity, and a long history of abandoning promises and abusing opponents.

    IOW, he’s as bad as Hillary.

    kishnevi (050eae)

  395. In warfare, there’s proportionate response and disproportionate response. Same in politics. I would always recommend that personal insults not be escalated by an offended politician beyond personal insults.

    So the best way to deal with a tweet by Trump about Mrs. Cruz is not, for example, to deliberately alter the course of history by putting Hillary in the White House, IMO. Other responses are possible, and more proportionate.

    Whatever one may think of the tweet that Trump sent out about Mrs. Cruz, it was preceded by considerable nasty material from Cruz allies such as Glenn Beck. As early as August 2015, Beck said Melania would be the first First Lady who had been pictured in “lesbian porno shots”. Others indirectly associated with Cruz continued in this vein, including Liz Mair and Andrea McWilliams. AFAIK, Cruz did not disavow Beck’s remarks, and instead has continued to closely associate with Beck. I honestly don’t know if Beck’s comment was accurate, or whether the photo of Mrs. Cruz that Trump tweeted was accurate; my objection is simply that Cruz has overreacted by allowing personal pique (perhaps justified) to create a political schism that may have dire historical effects.

    Andrew Hyman (b12b60)

  396. all ted’s doing is calling attention to his wife’s appearance and making it to where that tweeter gets a wider and wider audience

    ohnoes it’s the harvardtrash streisand effect

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  397. Glenn Beck is a sick little twist

    boy ain’t right in the head

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  398. @388. Nah, the JFK/Nixon debate was won on TV because K was telegenic and N was butt ugly. But K lost on radio. And it was in b/w anyway. For our modern DVR/videotape era, Reagan’s team really turned it into a clever, colorful, modern art. Pure stagecraft. Planning scenarios, camera angles, backgrounds, clothing… pure image manipulation…Deaver 101. And their guy and his spouse were trained in the medium- actors. Problem is, it has spiraled downward to give ‘viewers’ aka ‘voters’ the least objectionable program to watch- and vote for. The Great White Dope is popcorn popping on television with the sizzle of a NY strip steak. Nice family. Pretty wife. Clinton is a bowl of instant oatmeal cooling on television. And is genuinely irritating to listen to, so it’s easy to tune her– out regardless of what she’s saying. She’s Maude Findlay, not Eva Gabor. People may just roll the dice and go with him – simply because he’s entertaining. He has a very good chance of winning this.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  399. @388. See. Clinton chose Kaine. Whole white milk to pour on the bowl of instant oatmeal.

    My God, I’m voting Trump.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  400. DCSCA

    A Clinton/Kaine ticket would solve a lot of the income inequalities in our country right?

    Pinandpuller (0845e7)

  401. @401- MSNBC is already labeling him ‘boring and safe— not an exploding bowl of charisma.’ MSNBC!

    Memo to Hillary: ‘Balls said the queen. If I had’em I’d be the king.’ You ain’t got ’em, dear.

    My God, I’m voting Trump.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  402. @ Andrew Hyman, 396:

    Whatever one may think of the tweet that Trump sent out about Mrs. Cruz, it was preceded by considerable nasty material from Cruz allies such as Glenn Beck.

    Ah. So if a friend of mine says something uncomplimentary about your wife, that means it’s okay for you to go after my wife.

    Guilt by association isn’t actually a thing in this country, Sparky. Or at least it’s not supposed to be.

    Demosthenes (09f714)

  403. Demosthenes, the blockquote that you present is a purely factual statement. It doesn’t say that what Trump did was justified. Trump himself has properly said “I wish I didn’t do it”, and I think he ought to take the tweet down, as I’ve said before.

    Andrew Hyman (b12b60)

  404. when did it stop being about cruz’s principles and start being about his poor sad pseudo-victimized wife

    a harvardtrash multi-millionaire sacky who suffered a

    ohnoes!

    she suffered a sarcastic tweet!

    sad little harvardtrash snowflakes are sad

    what the hell is wrong with that school

    its breeds a ferocious entitlement to where minor slights are worth doing stinkypig all up the country’s butt, no matter how many people get hurt

    sick sick sick

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  405. the ted n heidi show should pause and reflect on…

    Laura Bush incident!

    In an interview published in USA Today in July 2004, [Teresa] Heinz [Kerry] was asked about the differences between the First Lady and herself:

    “Well, you know, I don’t know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in her eye, which is good. But I don’t know that she’s ever had a real job—I mean, since she’s been grown up. So her experience and her validation comes from important things, but different things. And I’m older, and my validation of what I do and what I believe and my experience is a little bit bigger–because I’m older, and I’ve had different experiences. And it’s not a criticism of her. It’s just, you know, what life is about.”[

    Heinz retracted the statement later, saying she was “sincerely sorry” for the remark. “I had forgotten that Mrs. Bush had worked as a schoolteacher and librarian, and there couldn’t be a more important job than teaching our children”, Heinz said. “As someone who has been both a full time mom and full time in the workforce, I know we all have valuable experiences that shape who we are. I appreciate and honor Mrs. Bush’s service to the country as first lady, and am sincerely sorry I had not remembered her important work in the past.”[

    Bush brushed it off, saying, “It didn’t matter to me. It didn’t hurt my feelings. It was perfectly all right that she apologized. She didn’t have to apologize. I know how tough it is. And actually I know those trick questions.”

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  406. those lil bracketer things i thought i erased

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  407. How many NeverTrumpers would refuse to vote for Kasich if he was the nominee? Kasich would be reliably conservative on nothing, whereas Trump would be reliably conservative on some things IMO. Maybe he would be as likely as Trump to appoint fairly conservative SCOTUS judges, but of course NeverTrumpers don’t seem to think the SCOTUS means anything.

    Gerald A (76f251)

  408. Gerald,
    Trump is responsible for the rapid increase in never trumpets

    You think you can take Trump at his word,
    in general I don’t, but if he doesn’t want the support of Cruz and by extension those who voted for him, that is something I will take seriously from him.

    This is not about what Trump said about his wife and father,
    this is about a double cross orchestrated in conjunction with the RNC to marginalize conservatives.
    It was successful,
    Consider us so marginalized we don’t care about Trump and the current RNC.
    If I can swing it, I will send money to Ryan’s primary opponent.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  409. people are responsible for their own feelings

    nobody can make you feel anything

    that’s just basic adulthood

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  410. Gerald: reliable and its derivatives are not words applicable to Trump. In fact, I think the opposite of you: Ksich will do some conservative things, Trump none. Last week when the police union called on him to suspend the Second Amendment he refused. Would Trump have done that?

    And if Kasich were the nominee, we’d now be wondering how badly Hillary would lose…

    kishnevi (050eae)

  411. I don’t think either Trump or Cruz fully understands that their very public conflict is seen by many voters as a test of whether each of them can be diplomatic, conciliatory, reasonable, and peaceful.

    Andrew Hyman (b12b60)

  412. How many? Voters. The word on 42nd Street is 13.6 million voters like people who fight.

    nk (dbc370)

  413. i like the ones who do fight on stinkypig

    personal preference

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  414. Voters like candidates who fight, not people who bicker. 😂

    Andrew Hyman (60e087)

  415. Gerald A, it’s tiresome how all the Trumpkins want to tell us NeverTrump people what we think but do everything except listen to what we say.

    We think Hillary will be a very bad President. Trumpkins who claim different are liars, not that that narrows it much. You Trumpkins fail to make the case that Trump would be better. You fail utterly to refute the case that he has no character either. Indeed, Trumpkin often revel in his lies, when they aren’t denying the very video in which he makes them.

    But the most amusing for me, at least, is watch Trump signal the con to the marks. And Trumpkin lap it up.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  416. So, Patterico, what did you say about people who dissed Cruz and his family on your site?

    I get tired of happyfeet flipping you off. His lecturing others about adulthood adds to the wonderfulness here.

    Your choice, but you did write it.

    Simon Jester (e4f607)

  417. heinlein would have like peter thiel, the closest thing to a dd harriman, he pointed out how we don’t make nearly enough things anymore,

    narciso (732bc0)

  418. you’re a bully

    you’re the weak little bully what tries to get other people to beat up the ones you don’t like

    everyone knows this about you Mr. Jester

    Your choice, but you did write it.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  419. ok the primaries are over, that cunning cunning plan which had the stink of acme, fell through, can we focus on the problem at hand,

    narciso (732bc0)

  420. #335
    Take a remedial reading class.
    I addressed that concern in my post

    steveg (fed1c9)

  421. Oh, happyfeet.

    You are an awful little troll.

    Keep in mind that this is not just my opinion.

    Hey, I have an idea: keep repeating what you have been saying about Ted Cruz and his wife?

    Patterico said people should knock that off, but you keep doing it.

    You know and I know you are just all about flipping him off.

    So please: continue being the ass you are. You can’t help it anyway. And when you get bad enough (and good God you write repulsive stuff), finally Patterico will have enough and boot your ass off this section.

    And that would be a good thing.

    You don’t have do any part of your nasty act. You could contribute and be positive.

    But folks like Beldar and Dana and DRJ and even Patterico have your number. People who supported you in the past have given up on you.

    You cannot help being a nasty, nasty man.

    Clean up, dude.

    Simon Jester (2b5dd3)

  422. Giving someone to God doesn’t mean you can’t shoot him in your home

    steveg (fed1c9)

  423. You Trumpkins fail to make the case that Trump would be better.

    SPQR (a3a747) — 7/22/2016 @ 7:02 pm

    Well now I’m a Trumpkin. Whatever.

    I’ve made it clear, repeatedly, that this election is about the courts to me. I believe he would not appoint liberal judges to SCOTUS. The argument that he would hinges entirely on a compliment he paid to his sister as far as I can tell. Beyond that lame argument NeverTrumpers ignore SCOTUS. I believe he genuinely supports the Second Amendment. He personally owns a gun. He’s been endorsed by the NRA. He understands the Second Amendment is at stake.

    Gerald A (76f251)

  424. kishnevi (050eae) — 7/22/2016 @ 6:17 pm

    Last week when the police union called on him to suspend the Second Amendment he refused. Would Trump have done that?

    Why, exactly, would I not think he would do that?

    And if Kasich were the nominee, we’d now be wondering how badly Hillary would lose…

    I don’t know what that has to do with anything at this point. But since you bring it up, did you vote for Kasich? If not, why not?

    Gerald A (76f251)

  425. forget it, Gerald it’s chinatown,

    narciso (732bc0)

  426. all butthurt pasty-white europe ever wanted was for failmerica to get real good tight in touch with the class struggle

    but

    does this taste like victory for them?

    we’ll see i guess

    but what i think?

    socialist euro-stinkypig?

    it’s best if we say no – (NO!)

    (precautionary principle)

    (whatever you’re looking for yale white old lady piggy stinky lawyer trash lady)

    don’t come around here no more

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  427. You think you can take Trump at his word,
    in general I don’t, but if he doesn’t want the support of Cruz and by extension those who voted for him, that is something I will take seriously from him.

    This is not about what Trump said about his wife and father,
    this is about a double cross orchestrated in conjunction with the RNC to marginalize conservatives.
    It was successful,
    Consider us so marginalized we don’t care about Trump and the current RNC.
    If I can swing it, I will send money to Ryan’s primary opponent.

    MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/22/2016 @ 6:04 pm

    I don’t know how not wanting Cruz’s support means by extension he doesn’t want Cruz supporters to vote for him. Total non sequitur.

    I said recently the NeverTrumpers seem more and more to me like Trumpers. I voted for Cruz in the primary and argued endlessly with Trumpers. But my identity is not somehow linked with Cruz. Some Trumpers here were suggesting something like that about Cruz supporters who don’t want to support Trump, and I thought they were projecting their own personal attachment to Trump onto Cruz supporters. It seems I was mistaken.

    What was the double cross MD?

    Gerald A (76f251)

  428. #DemExit

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  429. Gerald A,

    It’s like a college football rivalry where fans of Tech say that fans of State are dumb, and fans of State say that fans of Tech are cissies.
    It’s unbelievable.
    So while people are applying ice-packs to their bruised egos, President Hillary’s preparing to nominate several Justices to the Supreme Court who will probably remain there until the year 2056.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  430. CHANGE: I (was a lifer) am a Dem and I’m Voting for Trump. Let’s talk about it… #DemExit.

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/239459/

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  431. It’s like a college football rivalry where fans of Tech say that fans of State are dumb, and fans of State say that fans of Tech are cissies.
    It’s unbelievable.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 7/22/2016 @ 9:30 pm

    Good analogy. Where are the adults in the room?

    Gerald A (76f251)

  432. that’s entirely possible, douglas who was only 38, last almost that many years,

    narciso (732bc0)

  433. Waaah!!!

    In order to be labeled a bully, the bully must have some sort of power over the bullied. By definition. Who’s? The dictionary’s.
    Cruz was in no way, shape or form “bullied” by Trump. What Cruz was, was bested by Trump.
    Cruz IS an asshole, and you’re just mad that Trump walloped Cruz, and beat Cruz at his own game.
    If my opponents’ supporters worked for or helped a PAC circulate a pic of my scantily clad wife to every voter in Utah omitting the pic was the cover of an issue of GQ magazine, and my opponent never uttered a peep about it, you can bet I’d retweet a funny meme pointing out how my wife dusted my opponent’s wife in the looks department. Abso-friggin’-lutely. Turnabout is fair damn play. You wanna play in the mud? Prepare to have some slung back at you. That’s what I’d do if I respected MY wife. I’d turn around and fight.

    You, on the other hand, might prefer to extract your revenge on your opponent while simultaneously taking down something far greater at stake than just your (self described, but not really proven) wife’s (and father’s) “honor”.

    Ban if you must. The only time you post anymore is when it’s about Trump, and only then when it can be spun negative about Trump anyway, and honestly, your blog’s grown quite tiresome and boring.

    As far as I’m concerned, don’t let the door hit you on the ass on your way out of the Republican Party. Good riddance, as you’re exactly what’s wrong with it.

    School Marm (f12477)

  434. this is about a double cross orchestrated in conjunction with the RNC to marginalize conservatives.
    It was successful

    What is Pence anyway?

    Gerald A (76f251)

  435. Snort, giggle. The Trumpkin Ladies Auxiliary. Or do you prefer Frumpkins? Do you know Lori Gayne?

    nk (dbc370)

  436. American Satisfaction in Country Drops from Horrific 29% to Abysmal 17%; Right-Leaning #SmartSet Complains Trump’s Tone Was Too “Dark”
    —Ace

    “Fingers on the pulse of the national mood, these guys have.

    Last night I observed of the #SmartSet’s (and CNN’s) finding that the speech was “too dark:” “I congratulate those of you living in comfortable circumstances that many Americans do not.”

    Various geniuses — geniuses because they had the acumen to open a Twitter account — pronounced that a good convention speech should have “uplift” in it. Many — including the dummies at CNN — contrasted Trump’s speech unfavorably with Reagan’s “Morning in America” theme.

    Here’s the problem with that: It’s fucking stupid. “Morning in America” was Reagan’s 1984 election theme. That was the happy, uplifting campaign, because the country was doing well and Reagan already had the job as presidency.

    OF course he’s going to paint an uplifting picture! If he painted a “dark” picture, he’d be criticizing himself.

    But what was his 1980 theme, when he was the insurgent, trying to kick Jimmy Carter out of office?

    Well: It was a searing indictment of America under Carter. It was, in fact, dark.

    And how could it not be? You can’t convince a country to make an abrupt change in direction until you have convince them that the present circumstances are no longer tolerable.

    This is obvious.

    But our genius #SmartSet doesn’t get it.

    One of the reasons they’re plugging for this ridiculous theory is that it serves to push their Water-Fueled Robot Boy favorite, Marco Rubio, a famous happy-talker.

    As I said many times: One of the problems I had with Rubio was his sunshiney-everything’s-happy tone. If everything is sunny, shiny, and happy, Marco, why would I bother changing the current political team in charge of the country?

    If they have America in this swell of a shape, why shouldn’t I keep them in charge?

    Anyway, if you don’t believe me about Reagan, here’s his 1980 convention speech. Not his sunny “Keep me office” 1984 speech; this is his dark, angry “this other guy sucks and is destroying everything” 1980 speech.

    By the way, the #SmartSet is angry because Trump, by “running down” America, seems to be saying America isn’t great right now. And it is, darn it!!!

    Reagan’s 1980 campaign theme? “Let’s Make America Great.”

    As if it wasn’t so great under Carter. As if it needed to be made great.

    And just remember this the next time you get your information from CNN or the slightly more liberal GOP #SmartSet.

    So here you go: Here’s that sunny, uplifting, Gee Isn’t America Doing Swell Under Jimmy Carter speech Reagan gave in 1980. Feel the Rubibot Happytalk.”

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/364902.php

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  437. American Satisfaction in Country Drops from Horrific 29% to Abysmal 17%; Right-Leaning #SmartSet Complains Trump’s Tone Was Too “Dark”
    —Ace

    “Fingers on the pulse of the national mood, these guys have.

    Last night I observed of the #SmartSet’s (and CNN’s) finding that the speech was “too dark:” “I congratulate those of you living in comfortable circumstances that many Americans do not.”

    Various geniuses — geniuses because they had the acumen to open a Twitter account — pronounced that a good convention speech should have “uplift” in it. Many — including the dummies at CNN — contrasted Trump’s speech unfavorably with Reagan’s “Morning in America” theme.

    Here’s the problem with that: It’s fu*king stupid. “Morning in America” was Reagan’s 1984 election theme. That was the happy, uplifting campaign, because the country was doing well and Reagan already had the job as presidency.

    OF course he’s going to paint an uplifting picture! If he painted a “dark” picture, he’d be criticizing himself.

    But what was his 1980 theme, when he was the insurgent, trying to kick Jimmy Carter out of office?

    Well: It was a searing indictment of America under Carter. It was, in fact, dark.

    And how could it not be? You can’t convince a country to make an abrupt change in direction until you have convince them that the present circumstances are no longer tolerable.

    This is obvious.

    But our genius #SmartSet doesn’t get it.

    One of the reasons they’re plugging for this ridiculous theory is that it serves to push their Water-Fueled Robot Boy favorite, Marco Rubio, a famous happy-talker.

    As I said many times: One of the problems I had with Rubio was his sunshiney-everything’s-happy tone. If everything is sunny, shiny, and happy, Marco, why would I bother changing the current political team in charge of the country?

    If they have America in this swell of a shape, why shouldn’t I keep them in charge?

    Anyway, if you don’t believe me about Reagan, here’s his 1980 convention speech. Not his sunny “Keep me office” 1984 speech; this is his dark, angry “this other guy sucks and is destroying everything” 1980 speech.

    By the way, the #SmartSet is angry because Trump, by “running down” America, seems to be saying America isn’t great right now. And it is, darn it!!!

    Reagan’s 1980 campaign theme? “Let’s Make America Great.”

    As if it wasn’t so great under Carter. As if it needed to be made great.

    And just remember this the next time you get your information from CNN or the slightly more liberal GOP #SmartSet.

    So here you go: Here’s that sunny, uplifting, Gee Isn’t America Doing Swell Under Jimmy Carter speech Reagan gave in 1980. Feel the Rubibot Happytalk.”

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/364902.php

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  438. the smart set, those words you are using,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzMas1bVidw

    narciso (732bc0)

  439. If Cruz is so smart, how was he beaten by Trump?

    mg (31009b)

  440. pence is the sum of money.

    mg (31009b)

  441. Never before has Ace lied so much for so little. Reagan’s theme in 1980 was NOT “Let’s Make America Great”. It was “America Is Too Great To Dream Small Dreams”. Do you know what the meaning of “is” is?

    Reagan’s criticism of Carter was “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” B-e-t-t-e-r. Implying that the country was at a standstill, and could do better, not in a fallout zone.

    Comparing Trump to Reagan is like comparing Chelsea Manning to Audie Murphy.

    nk (dbc370)

  442. Pence is a token conservative in a position to do nothing,
    like Casey Jr. is supposedly a pro-life Democrat

    But yes, once upon a time he seemed to be the real deal,
    now he has to keep a calm demeanor while standing behind Trump going off of the deep end again, and again, and …

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  443. To clarify, school marm above claims Cruz was associated with the pic of Melania,
    a claim that appears to have been successfully denounced.

    Yes, if it could be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that Cruz was in on that, the opinion of many of us would be different about some things,
    but even if that was the case,
    the back-stabbing of Cruz was very ugly and revealing of Trump and the RNC.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  444. School Marm, why do you repeat the lie that attack on Trump’s wife’s cheesecake photo was by Cruz supporters and that Cruz “never uttered a peep about it” ?

    Why do Trumpkins lie so much? Oh, never mind. I know the answer to that. Because Daddy tells them to.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  445. Gerald A., indeed Trump was endorsed by the NRA – and within hours of the endorsement was lauding the Democrats’ proposal to add the Terror watch list to the NICS background check prohibitions.

    A fail by the NRA in my opinion.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  446. If Cruz is so smart, how was he beaten by Trump?
    mg (31009b) — 7/22/2016 @ 10:15 pm

    Because there are too many morons like mg, papertiger, ropelight and schist-for-brains-feet who will buy into all the blatant lies Trump tells.

    John Hitchcock (a647ad)

  447. you are so wrong Mr. H (may I call you Mr. H?)

    you are go home and work more harder to be perspicacious

    because what you do not see is that

    Mr. Trump, he has a truth, and it is sublime, and it has a corollary

    Mr. Trump’s truth is that flaws and all, with all his brashness and his mopsy flopsy topsy (and his smoking hot wife)

    Mr. Trump’s truth is that he’s an American, a goddamn American(!) god love him

    and the corollary is obvious of course

    stinkypig is not an American, she’s a repudiation of America, she is vile, and she is fetid

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  448. you mean like the insinuation that trump’s father was with the klan,

    Well, he was arrested at a klan march, on a charge of “refusing to disperse from a parade when ordered to do so”. That is a established fact, not a rumor. One newspaper report claimed that all seven men arrested were “berobed marchers”.

    This doesn’t prove he was a klansman, but it’s valid suggestive evidence.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  449. you’re certain Clinton will be a disaster, and you’re fairly sure Trump won’t be as much of a disaster. But what is your basis for that conclusion? I’m sure that the people in Eastern Europe were pretty damn happy they were out from under Hitler, thinking no one else would be as bad…and then they had to deal with Uncle Joe.

    And there were many people who made the opposite mistake at the beginning of the War, and turned down the chance to flee into the USSR, not believing the horror stories they’d heard, unable to believe that the German occupation troops who had been so nice and civilized in WW1 could have turned so bad in a mere 22 years. So they stayed and were killed.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  450. do you think the Trump IRS director will be harassing everyone to the right of Mao

    I absolutely think Trump’s IRS director will attempt to harass his enemies, and I don’t care whether they’re on the right or the left. (The only caveat on that is that the career IRS staff will refuse to go along with Trump’s harassment, but will go along with Clinton’s.)

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  451. How many NeverTrumpers would refuse to vote for Kasich if he was the nominee? Kasich would be reliably conservative on nothing, whereas Trump would be reliably conservative on some things IMO.

    Your opinion is wrong. Kasich was a good congressman and a decent governor, and would make an acceptable president. At the beginning of the campaign I decided I could support any one of the 17 starters, except Trump and Huckabee. And nothing since then has changed my mind.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  452. I have seen the laughable claims that Cruz violated the “pledge”, which Trump tossed out a while ago…

    Sean (221079) — 7/21/2016 @ 10:00 am

    Trump tossed the pledge out on March 29th, to be exact, saying it would have to depend on who the nominee is if he would support the GOP nominee or not. But, Sean, it seems you don’t understand how personality cults work. The Trumpkins don’t care how many promises or pledges their cult idol breaks. The only promises or pledges that matter to them are loyalty oaths to their Dear Leader. As far as the Trumpkins are concerned a pledge of loyalty to Trump overrides everything else including their own marriage vows to love, honor, and respect their spouses. Hence their hatred of Cruz for deciding differently.

    But to sane people the fact that Trump was the first who said he’d break his pledge back in March, in addition to maligning Cruz’s family, freed Cruz from any obligation to endorse Trump. Not that I expect facts to have any effect on the Trumpkin personality cultists. More facts; Trump is not running as the leader of the GOP. Trump is not a team player, as he demonstrated when he decided to invite Cruz to speak, knowing what he would say, just so he could insult him. And, by the way, all the millions of Cruz voters. As far as he’s concerned he’s made a hostile takeover of the GOP and it’s now a subsidiary of Trump Inc. He doesn’t give a rat’s @$$ about any of the downticket candidates. He doesn’t care if the GOP loses the Senate. He doesn’t care about anyone but Trump.

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-doesnt-mind-being-free-agent-if-senate-gop-majority-falls/article/2596399

    What does Donald Trump think about Republicans maintaining their Senate majority?

    “Well, I’d like them to do that. But I don’t mind being a free agent, either,” Trump replied when that question was posed to him.

    As the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Trump is set to become the titular head of the party at the GOP convention in Cleveland. This often entails campaigning for down-ballot Republicans.

    Trump entered into a joint fundraising agreement with the Republican National Committee, raising some money for the party. But he is heavily reliant on the RNC for his national campaign apparatus, which makes Republicans running for other offices nervous they won’t receive the support they need…

    Of course the other Republicans are right; they won’t receive the support they need. Trump has always been too lazy and disorganized to do his own fundraising (and he never was rich enough to self-fund it). So RNC now works as an extension of his campaign; it’s his fundraising arm, no one else’s. The other GOP candidates can pack sand.

    It was a good bet that the GOP would lose control of the Senate anyway. Trump is virtually guaranteeing it because he just doesn’t care if the GOP holds the Senate. He’s saying so.

    It also means he doesn’t care about any of the “promises” he made to you Trumpkin personality cultists. The only way he can close the border, stop the “Muslim invasion,” nominate conservative Supreme Court justices, etc., is if the GOP holds the Senate. If Chuck Schumer is the Senate majority leader you can forget it.

    Trump doesn’t plan on having any coattails for the downticket candidates; they’re on their own as far as he’s concerned. He just doesn’t care as he’s only in it for Trump. Besides, he knows and likes Schumer and Pelosi. You Trumpkin personality cultists thought it would be a good idea to elect an unprincipled deal maker. That’s exactly what you’re getting.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/01/26/trump_i_have_a_great_relationship_with_nancy_pelosi_harry_reid_chuck_schumer.html#!

    You elected a guy who likes and can work with socialists, but doesn’t like and can’t work with conservatives. Which is why Trump thought it was a good idea to give the finger to Cruz supporters, which is exactly what he did with that planned insult of Cruz. And it’s why he’s appealing to disillusioned Sanders supporters to vote for him. For all those who think there’s some hope that Trump will somehow be Reaganesque when he’s President, tell me; when did Reagan appeal to the kind of communists and socialists who would support someone like Sanders? Communists and socialists did exist back when he was running for and then governing as President. They existed when he was governor of Kali, BTW. I don’t remember Reagan ever appealing to them to join his campaign. I don’t remember Reagan ever taking policy positions that would have appealed to communists and socialists. Unlike Trump, who has promised policies that do appeal to communists and socialists.

    When, not if, Trump reneges on his promises to seal the border, stop the “Muslim invasion,” etc., we can be sure of one thing. The Trumpkin personality cultists won’t mind one bit. They’ve already demonstrated that there’s nothing Trump can do to break off this slobbering, mindless love affair they have with the man. And when Trump acts on his liberal New York instincts and works with Schumer to institute fully socialized medicine and tosses that meaningless list in the trash can and lets the Senate dems pick the next SCOTUS justices, that won’t bother them either. History shows they’ll find a way to rationalize and declare it a brilliant move, and they’ll love the object of their cult’s worship even more.

    Steve57 (2d3b12)

  453. I absolutely think Trump’s IRS director will attempt to harass his enemies, and I don’t care whether they’re on the right or the left. (The only caveat on that is that the career IRS staff will refuse to go along with Trump’s harassment, but will go along with Clinton’s.)

    Milhouse (5a188d) — 7/23/2016 @ 10:06 pm

    Those career IRS bureaucrats will go along with Trump’s harassment if Trump wants to harass the same people they want to harass. “Right wingers.”

    These career IRS bureaucrats and federal employee union members believe in ever bigger, unaccountable, all powerful government. That’s why you’ll never find a “smoking gun,” a memo on White House stationary signed by Barack Obama telling them to target his enemies such as the Tea Party and True the Vote groups. Those groups want to cut government and hold it accountable. That makes those groups the natural enemies of the those career bureaucrats and union members. All Obama had to do was subtly let them know they weren’t going to get in trouble if they followed their instincts when he let them off their leash. Which you can find in many of his public speeches.

    Of course, as you can see from the emails produced during the Lois Lerner investigation, there were more direct links such as the IRS illegally sharing taxpayer information with the DoJ so they could fish for possible violations committed by those conservative groups who sought tax exempt status. JFK, Tiger Beat’s hero and role model for how to conduct diplomacy, and his brother and AG Robert did the same thing the same way. The Kennedy administration established an “Ideological Organizations Audit project” within the IRS to go after JFK’s political enemies.

    As long as the career bureaucrats share Trump’s view on who is their shared enemy, they’ll cooperate with Trump just as easily.

    Steve57 (2d3b12)

  454. …If we don’t win now there will be no chance at 20anything…

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6) — 7/21/2016 @ 8:29 am

    What makes you think that you, Rev., are included in Trump’s idea of “we?”

    Steve57 (2d3b12)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.0889 secs.