[Walker] didn't name Trump when he left the presidential race, but made clear then that he didn't want him as the nominee. He said at the time he was "helping to clear the field" and hoped others would do the same "so that the voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive conservative alternative to the current front-runner."
Last summer, Trump attacked Walker, saying "Wisconsin is doing terribly" under him, citing problems with the state budget. Nonetheless, Walker said during his presidential run that he would support the eventual nominee.....
March 29, 2016
Scott Walker endorses Ted Cruz.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
46 comments:
Open primary and low approval ratings for Walker. Things keep breaking Trump's way
Dumb move by Scotty. No surprise.
I know many Trump supporters are going to decide they now hate Walker, but this is an act of some political courage. Trump is more than likely going to be the nominee, so the easy path is the get behind that guy. Walker went with his convictions instead, as usual.
When Trump gets to Janesville today, he should bark as loud as he can against the protestors. Call them agitators. Lazy scumbags. Anti-free speech. Remind Wisconsin how they tried to thwart the process in 2011.
Walker supporters and Sykes listeners are sick of that shit. They would hear it sympathetically.
The more protestors the better today. Puts Walker and Sykes in an awkward position.
Not the Bern?
Actually, I thought he'd go Kasich. That's probably his real preference, but he's joined the stop Trump team.
@WritSmall, you have a better opinion of Politicians than I.
Walker did what his donors told him to do.
Scott's voice was not that into it. He probably hates Cruz too. But his future depends on big Koch Money and so he toes the line against the Trump Revolt.
Movement? What Movement? We are Wisconsin, and we don't need any stinking Movement.
I would have been more interested in who Walker would have endorsed when he first dropped out of the race. Now politicians are lining up "For Trump" and "Not Trump". It doesn't really say all that much about what they're for when they endorse Cruz at this late date. Just that they don't want Trump. Like people going into a voting booth and voting "Not Hillary" when they vote for whoever the Republican is. Not much of a vote for the Republican. It counts, but it's not an endorsement.
Watch hate avalanche hit Walker now.
Trump - winning with anger and hate!
It would have been impressive had he endorsed Kasich, but Kasich is a successful governor whose state is doing better than just getting by.
Cruz is too quick to go politically correct, meaning that he can't solve any problems.
Rhhardin -- when has he gone PC? I missed it.
Like people going into a voting booth and voting "Not Hillary" when they vote for whoever the Republican is.
NTTAWWT
A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for corruption on a scale not seen since the Grant administration back in the 19th century.
I guess the Trumpkins must want Donald Trump to be the Governor of Wisconsin, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina and Indiana. And also the U.S. Senator from Illinois, Wisconsin, Nevada, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. That's all in addition to being president.
Because Trump isn't helping in those places, and those incumbents aren't helping Trump.
Cruz is on live now making a Scenery chewing profound soliloquy God Blessing Scott Walker for being such a Principled Conservative doing God's will.
But the crowd is faking its applause, after every dramatic pause They know it's an actor using written lines playing his part. Sad stuff.
"Watch hate avalanche hit Walker now.
Trump - winning with anger and hate!"
Sez miss Trump-hate 24-7.
Your progressive sisters have a nice cozy coven waiting for you as soon as you realize it's your true emotional safe space.
For good measure - The National Enquirer story about Cruz and his 5 extra marital affairs is about to break... also - Walker will be indicted any minute now.
Paul - you only prove my point.
Real progressives support Trump.
"With nuclear, the power, the devastation is very important to me."
-Donald Trump
Cruz and his 5 extra marital affairs
That needs a hyphen, probably.
Traditionalguy - It is a shame, historically speaking, that you didn't get to cheer Caesar. Trump is a poor substitute. Maybe it is just something people need to get out of their systems.
Trump will likely lose to Hillary. Cruz would certainly lose to her.
These are my favorites:
"The economy does better under the Democrats." "I like universal healthcare." "Hillary Clinton is a terrific woman. She's a really good person."
Trump 21012: "You have to give them a path. You have 20 million, 30 million, nobody knows what it is. It used to be 11 million. Now, today I hear it’s 11, but I don’t think it’s 11. I actually heard you probably have 30 million. You have to give them a path, and you have to make it possible for them to succeed. You have to do that."
--Donald Trump.
"Paul - you only prove my point."
Hardly but hate on. Feels so good ya gotta do it all day long in every post doncha?
AprilApple said...
"Trump - winning with anger and hate!"
I do hate self serving politicians who are just doing the bidding of donors. I know what Walker is up against and empathize. He needs donor money to remain in the political realm.
Who knows what Walker actually thinks. But I know for a fact he was ordered to do this. He hates Cruz.
Oso Negro said...
"Traditionalguy - It is a shame, historically speaking, that you didn't get to cheer Caesar. Trump is a poor substitute. Maybe it is just something people need to get out of their systems."
Straw men, lies, and pure bad faith wrapped up in ad hominem clothing.
This is the extent of the nevertrumpers reasoning.
For good measure - The National Enquirer story about Cruz and his 5 extra-marital affairs is about to break... also - Walker will be indicted any minute now.
Thank you, RH. Done.
This endorsement is good, but awfully, awfully late in the game.
I don't agree with the strategy of many GOP bigwigs to wait so long to endorse in the primaries.
It's an anti-Trump endorsement hoping to get a brokered convention not a pro-Cruz endorsement. None of these guys like Cruz, or at least the people who fund these guys and give jobs to their family members don't like Cruz.
I am pretty disappointed in Mr. Walker who was my candidate going in. I am a pro-trump supporter and I thought Walker would be a supporter of the middle-class in the country as well.
@Althouse, back on March 5th, you challenged us regarding Ted Cruz as follows:
"You should imagine Ted Cruz with his positions flipped on the issues you care about, so that he's the opposite of pro-life and traditional marriage and all those things you hold dear. Really get inside that visualization. Picture him arguing those positions in his inimitable style, with utter conviction and inflexibility. If you can do that, let me know how much you like that version of Ted Cruz ..."
And the thing is, I think I'd like it fine. First, because I'd really like to face an honest argument with a social liberal. Who knows, I might even change my mind on a few things.
I think of myself as a fiscal conservative but a social moderate, and to pick on an issue that's been festering for a half a century, I believe that abortion should be legal but safe. I view you, Professor, as being considerably to my left. Considerably. I think that abortion at any time during the pregnancy, including well after the point where the baby (yeah, I know, loaded word) could survive outside the mother, for any reason or no reason whatsoever is an extreme position. No restrictions whatsoever on abortion? Why not? We have restrictions on firearm ownership, we have restrictions on automobile driving, we have licensing restrictions on fields from law (passing the bar exam) down to hair styling. But no restrictions whatsoever on abortion or abortion clinics? Yes, that's an extreme position.
More to the point, I'm concerned that there must be more Kermit Gosnells out there, tacitly supported by the pro-abortion folks (oops, pro-choice), apparently in the belief that any women who die at the hands of a Kermit Gosnell-type abortionist are merely collateral damage. And besides, they're mostly poor women so which limousine liberal would really care about them?
Oh yes, abortion clinics. The clinic where I had my colonoscopy last year is subject to numerous regulations including width of hallways so that if anything whatsoever goes wrong -- and it's hard to imagine an outpatient procedure less risky than a colonoscopy -- I can be put on a gurney and rushed out the door to an ambulance to take me to a nearby hospital. The gastroenterologist and his colleagues have admission privileges at that hospital so I could be wisked into surgery if anything had gone wrong (which it didn't). But abortion clinics shouldn't have to meet similar standards? Why not? Is mid- or late-term abortion less risky than a colonoscopy?
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there's a liberal version of Ted Cruz who can convince me. But I don't know who that would be. Even Paglia can be a pretty facile thinker in my estimation.
I'm glad that Ted Cruz makes you uncomfortable, Professor. Even at our advanced ages it's good to challenge premises and assumptions, and rethink old positions in the light of a modern world.
He said at the time he was "helping to clear the field" and hoped others would do the same "so that the voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive conservative alternative to the current front-runner."
In retrospect, that was a bad idea. Every time a Republican candidate has dropped out, some percentage of their supporters has gone to Trump. So Trump's ceiling has risen from 30% to 40% (it may be higher than that). Had Walker, Fiorina, Carson, Christie, Jeb!, and Rubio stayed in the race, Trump would almost certainly not have enough delegates to win on the first convention ballot. (NB I left Graham out of the above list. No one was supporting that loser's vanity campaign anyway.)
On the other hand, I don't think Walker was entirely prepared for the ordeal of a Presidential campaign, so I understand why he would exit as soon as the tide shifted against him.
Love Walker but doubt this hurts Trump at all. Trump's base is not Walker's base, which is something the GOPe types are still trying to wrap their heads around.
It's an anti-Trump endorsement hoping to get a brokered convention not a pro-Cruz endorsement. None of these guys like Cruz, or at least the people who fund these guys and give jobs to their family members don't like Cruz.
When you say "none of these guys", you mean the GOP establishment, right? Walker actually pissed off the establishment by coming out strong against illegal immigration. It was kind of a flip for him. I thought he explained it well. Maybe too well, since the establishment abandoned him at that point, and I guess Walker couldn't see a way forward without their money. Which is interesting, since Cruz and Trump are proving you don't need the GOPe's money to win primaries. Hopefully Walker is learning, and getting ready for 2020.
"I would have been more interested in who Walker would have endorsed when he first dropped out of the race. Now politicians are lining up "For Trump" and "Not Trump". It doesn't really say all that much about what they're for."
---------------
Scott Walker comments when he dropped out of the race.
"The Bible is full of stories of people being called to lead in unusual ways,” he said. “I believe I am being called to lead by helping clear the field.”
“I encourage other Republican presidential candidates to do the same, so the voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive conservative alternative to the current frontrunner,” he said. “This is fundamentally important to the future of the party and more importantly, to the future of our country.”"
Trump attacked Walker mercilessly, of course Walker tried to unite the other candidates and conservatives against Trump when he dropped out, it didn't work then, it's not going to work now.
April Apple,
Liberal progressives loathe Trump, just an FYI.
I like Scott Walker. But I like Trump more.
Walker, like several other of the early Republican candidates, saw the poll numbers Trump and Cruz were getting and made the mistake of going anti-immigrant when those two already had the bigot votes sewn up. If he'd run as the anti-bigot, he might have gotten somewhere. Rubio couldn't do it, because he was on both sides of the issue.
Unless Hillary is indicted first, she will win in November, mostly for the same reason that Romney lost: the Republicans are going to get hammered by the Hispanic vote. You simply can't give away all of the black vote, and almost all of the Hispanic vote, and still expect to win. Trump is going one better, in that he's also trying to give away most of the white female vote as well.
"You simply can't give away all of the black vote, and almost all of the Hispanic vote, and still expect to win. Trump is going one better, in that he's also trying to give away most of the white female vote as well."
Yes indeed.
Now Trump is going after Walker for NOT raising taxes! LOL. A Republican front runner.
Trump said in an interview:
"There’s a $2.2bn deficit [in Wisconsin] and the schools were going begging and everything was going begging because he didn’t want to raise taxes ’cause he was going to run for president. So instead of raising taxes, he cut back on schools, he cut back on highways, he cut back on a lot of things."
Trump also added of the Badger State in general: "Wisconsin has a lot of problems, plus there is tremendous hatred … I wouldn’t exactly say that things are running smoothly."
Gusty Winds said...The more protestors the better today. Puts Walker and Sykes in an awkward position.
--
Not really. Probably be glad to see Trump get a piece of that action.
Blacks know that Latinos aren't their friends and that Latinos are the new pets of the Dems. Blacks aren't going to vote GOP but if they sat out this presidential election because illegal immigration was hurting them the most, and it is, then Hillary would build a wall even faster than Trump. If the GOP were smart, they would change their dumb policies and go after the black vote. Outspend the Dems and build federal charter schools and daycare centers and investigate all the corruption of those who are parasites on blacks. But the GOP is dumb. It's all tax cuts for the rich and defense spending welfare for the Lockheeds
Blogger Achilles said...
Oso Negro said...
"Traditionalguy - It is a shame, historically speaking, that you didn't get to cheer Caesar. Trump is a poor substitute. Maybe it is just something people need to get out of their systems."
Straw men, lies, and pure bad faith wrapped up in ad hominem clothing.
This is the extent of the nevertrumpers reasoning.
3/29/16, 10:38 AM
No, it is not the extent of my reasoning. I have posted my objections to Lord Donald here in detail. I have found his supporters uncommonly impervious to argument, and will continue random vituperation.
Oso Negro said...
No, it is not the extent of my reasoning. I have posted my objections to Lord Donald here in detail. I have found his supporters uncommonly impervious to argument, and will continue random vituperation.
That sort of twaddle is only fit to tweet for a twit.
Matt said...
Now Trump is going after Walker for NOT raising taxes! LOL. A Republican front runner.
You forget that Wisconsin is a classic swing state. Hillary is loathed and many honest Dems will choose between Bernie and Trump. They're not going to vote for Rev. Ted.
Post a Comment