But it seems that Trump knew Cruz wasn't going to endorse...
"He didn't ask me to endorse and, indeed, three days ago I talked on the phone with him and told him, ‘I'm not going to endorse you,’" Cruz said, defending his non-endorsement speech.... so it's not as though he lied his way into that speaking slot. But he did choose to take the stage, unlike Rubio — who had a little video just before Cruz's slot — and Kasich — who's nowhere to be seen, even with the convention in his home state.
Cruz's statement that Trump knew in advance there'd be no endorsement is backed up (after the fact) by Trump:
Wow, Ted Cruz got booed off the stage, didn't honor the pledge! I saw his speech two hours early but let him speak anyway. No big deal!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 21, 2016
So you have to wonder whether Trump is lying to save face after the fact, whether Trump is easygoing and accepting of a diversity of views — No big deal!* — or whether Trump thought Cruz's sanctimonious on-stage preening would ultimately serve Trump's interests.**
________________________
* Says the man who's central concept is the deal.
** Everything seems to ultimately serve Trump's interests. Ever notice?
पोस्ट्स
१३४ टिप्पण्या:
Whatever Trump knew or didn't know matters little to me in this regard. This is about Ted Cruz.
He was just like director Comey. He laid out the argument for why we shouldn't elect Hillary and then he says, vote your conscience. Just like Comey lays out all the reasons Hillary should be indicted and then says she shouldn't be.
You know, if you can't go and support the ticket, stay home.
This seemed very self serving to me. Trying to wreck Trump's chances to set himself up for 2020.
Well, he has lost my support.
Some of your commenters were ridiculing me last night, for suggesting that among the several problems for Trump in seeking the approval of establishment/leading Republicans was Trump's own history of outrageous insults aimed at those people. Why would anyone not expect that?
And why would Trump not take serious, rapid steps to repair the damage?
or whether Trump thought Cruz's sanctimonious on-stage preening would ultimately serve Trump's interests.**
I think Trump did think exactly that, and he was right. On substance, it's reasonably worthwhile support, but using Cruz's humiliation to discredit the NeverTrump faction made for a fine recovery from Day 1 with all the walkouts. Or was that Day 2?
Does Trump need to save face for something? Because the party's least liked Scooby Doo villain broke a promise and/or committed political seppuku?
As much fun as MSM is having, Pence was really the biggest story.
Strong horse, weak horse?
** Everything seems to ultimately serve Trump's interests. Ever notice?
This is what Scott Adams says when he talks about Trump being a systems guy. He wins in all the scenarios by letting Cruz speak last night.
Cruz is the redneck who "showed up in boots, and ruined your black tie affair". Blame it all on his roots.
Trump looks like a free speech advocate to me.
Cruz ended any chance of ever becoming President last night.
Eric Trump was good. Gingrich was good. Pence was great. I think Trump figures the only people giving any credence to the media hyperventilation are Hillary supporters.
"You know, if you can't go and support the ticket, stay home. "
Like Bush, Kasich, and Paul (and perhaps others). If I was Cruz and had my wife and father personally attacked, I wouldn't endorse Trump either. Would I make a speech? Of course. That's what I do.
ARM had it right. This is all WWE theatrics. Trump knew the crowd would turn on Ted so he let him do it. Ted miscalculated. The WWE is a lizard brain thing which Harvard Ted doesn't get.
Re: Chuck:
Some of your commenters were ridiculing me last night, for suggesting that among the several problems for Trump in seeking the approval of establishment/leading Republicans was Trump's own history of outrageous insults aimed at those people. Why would anyone not expect that?
Cruz is not an establishment Republican, and it's somewhat doubtful whether he qualifies as a "leading" Republican at this point -- he was able to win some caucuses and primaries, but I don't think he's translated that into a deep base of support yet. This speech was supposed to be a step in that direction.
From the perspective of making nice with the Republican Establishment, I think humiliating Cruz on prime time was worth a lot of nasty comments to the Establishment. And the non-Establishment. One hears repeatedly that his colleagues in the Senate absolutely loathe Cruz.
"Everything seems to ultimately serve Trump's interests." No. This is a big distraction, a sign of division and incompetence.
"And why would Trump not take serious, rapid steps to repair the damage?" Methinks giving Cruz a prime slot, without an ironclad commitment to endorse, was a step to repair the damage.
I don't really know what the conventions are for. So I don't know why they matter.
Cruz tries to justify his dishonorable behavior. Loser!
The record shows Trump attacked Cruz's hyper political wife and fake Religious spokesman for God father by exposing them with old photos of them from the public record. That's all folks. If the photo fits, wear it
Now who is thin skinned?
Cruz is showing himself to be more sneaky Canadian than brave Texan.
@rehajm: "As much fun as MSM is having, Pence was really the biggest story." Sorry, no. You wish. But MSM still get to determine biggest story. WSJ front page this morning: GOP Party Unity Cracks.
Trump missed an opportunity to be magnanimous here. But Trump's gift and curse is that he can never let anything go.
I'm bored of all this squabbling. The only person it helps is Hillary Clinton.
Re: Sebastian:
"And why would Trump not take serious, rapid steps to repair the damage?" Methinks giving Cruz a prime slot, without an ironclad commitment to endorse, was a step to repair the damage.
Yes, it gave everyone who wasn't quite sold on Clinton II being worse than Trump the opportunity to bond over how much they all hate Ted Cruz. It was the best unity building exercise a candidate could have hoped for.
If you want to label Cruz as NON-establishment, and anti-leadership, that's fine with me. I thought that brand of anti-establishmentarianism was what the Trumpkins liked.
I personally like the "staunch conservative" and "constitutional purist" parts of Ted Cruz. Anybody who reads the text of Cruz's speech should be very impressed.
The point is the convention made news. Conventions never make news. Trump wanted the convention to make news. Even the MSM is keeping the convention story as the lead item. And everytime the story runs, most listeners hear, "Blah, blah, Trump, blah, blah, Trump.." (Like the famous Far Side about What Dogs Hear.
Begley and ARM are right.
Trump is very very good at the lizard brain stuff.
Adams may be over-elaborating this, but he's on a useful track.
Many others are way too intellectual about all this.
As for insults and the like, at this level of play they are tools. If professionals are distracted by them, rather than simply using them, or the reaction to them, as rhetorical foils, then they arent serious.
Trump is very good at pretending outrage.
Ted Cruz just gave the finger to some people who had previously voted for him. Re-election may be a tougher ride next time.
Walker came out strongly for Cruz and against Trump, and his poll numbers remain down. You can't kick your own people and expect them to forget it and go back to supporting you.
Everyone loves it when these guys kick Democrats around, but they have both failed to realize once you start kicking your own people you lose your base. Perhaps even permanently.
FTR Pence is a super guy. He makes Indiana niceness a plus without eschewing a good fight. Wonderful pick by two men who want to,win more than they want the credit for it.
But they still need Newt to splain things.
During the primary my position on Cruz was I like what he says, but he always comes off as a dick.
Last night he doubled down on the dick part.
If you are invited to a wedding where you don't like the groom, stay home. If you go anyway don't take the mic and give vent....
"Sorry, no. You wish. But MSM still get to determine biggest story. WSJ front page this morning: GOP Party Unity Cracks."
Sorry, No. MSM can spin but they aren't entitled to their own facts...
If Cruz wasn't willing to endorse Trump then why get up and speak? He couldn't resist the limelight.
From Trump's point of view it was a case of "give 'em enough rope..."
FWIW, during the primaries I placed Cruz well ahead of Trump on my wish list.
But I live in the now. Now is where Trump is the one running against Hillary.
To me that is now the only substantive issue.
Re: Chuck:
If you want to label Cruz as NON-establishment, and anti-leadership, that's fine with me. I thought that brand of anti-establishmentarianism was what the Trumpkins liked.
Chuck, in your first post, weren't you just saying that Trump was seeking the approval of the establishment? I agree! The establishment hates Cruz. They were torn between whether they hated Trump or Cruz more, which is why didn't coalesce around Cruz after Iowa, when it might actually have worked. Humiliating Cruz is great for building a working relationship with the establishment.
It's true that both Cruz and Trump are anti-establishment . . . so? That's why early in the race, they were each the second choice of a huge chunk of each others' supporters. But Trump is playing a different game now, exactly as you suggested -- he is courting establishment/leading Republicans.
And this has worked out as an excellent way for him to do that without actually having set Cruz up (to all appearances, he just let Cruz wind himself up and implode), or having to retract any of the nasty things he said about the establishment.
It just shows that Ted is the kind of Jackass who shows up at your party and complains to the other guests about the food.
From what I'm hearing, Cruz is finished in TX and probably in the GOP.
The same Ted Cruz who talked about the importance of his word, when specifically asked about the pledge at some of the later debates....couldn't live up to his commitment.
...just like he couldn't give up the opportunity to speak in front of a national audience (which mattered more to him than his integrity).
Trump did know Cruz was not going to endorse; that's why the boos and chants came up from the floor. Everyone else at the convention talked about the importance of party unity; Gov. Walker talked about the original pledge during his speech; Sen. Rubio gave remarks via tape. They let him speak because the Trump campaign made Cruz look like the Senator who prefers ideological purity over getting anything done (which is exactly why he lost to Trump).
Then they had Gingrich put the nail in the coffin by saying what Ted Cruz should have said.
The tune in for the Trump speech tonight is going to be, well, huge....because of the way Trump worked over the Cruz campaign one last time.
"This is what Scott Adams says when he talks about Trump being a systems guy. He wins in all the scenarios by letting Cruz speak last night."
Yeah, I haven't checked Adams's blog yet, but he'll almost surely say Trump the genius meant to do that.
The Convention listened to Cruz with respect until it became a pastor-like lecture / stump speech. Then it became boring.
Memo to Cruz. Spend some money on focus groups and find out why they are bored by (his) metaphysics.
Not a word from the media about the 2008 meme, "Party Unity My Ass," or PUMA for short. But that was Democrat women saying that. And then they caved.
Cruz's rationale is blatantly insincere. Cruz surely knew, when he decided to run for president, that he would be on the receiving end of far worse attacks than an unflattering photo of his wife being posted on the internet. You don't decline to endorse your own party's presidential nominee over something that petty. He broke his pledge because of his own presidential ambitions — he wants to be able to run in the future and say "told ya so."
Hmmm...I don't think Ted plays a losing hand very well. Never has, probably never will.
He always seems to be doing something to spoil the opportunity for the GOP, usually accompanied by loud cries protesting his fidelity to bedrock principle. Who can forget his drive for a government shutdown just as the Obamacare rollout was about to fall flat on its face? Has he ever explained what his endgame was for the other government shutdowns he tried to force? Ted seems to be in love with principled failure.
Ted seems to love that last stand at the Alamo. I have a strong preference for the battle at San Jacinto.
Politics ain't beanbag, Ted. Man up and do the right thing. Or stay home.
I don't get why anyone would think there is a good excuse to break your pledge.
What's the point of making a pledge if you're just going to be able to break it depending on circumstances? Thats supposed to be why you make the pledge. It's not, "Well, as long as X doesn't happen.... I pledge..."
I supported Cruz during the primaries and wanted him to be our next president.
He has seriously let me down. He isn't the man of character I thought he was.
"no big deal"
Thin skinned rage filled throne sniffers: If Trump doesn't care, why don't you get over it?
Cruz should be clever enough to endorse Trump for the sake of beating Hillary, while at the same time spanking him for insulting his wife. Pretty sure most commenters here could do it.
Blogger AprilApple said...
"no big deal"
Thin skinned rage filled throne sniffers: If Trump doesn't care, why don't you get over it?
I guess because I thought Cruz was a better man than this.
And when my thoughts and feelings about someone are shattered by their actions, it's tough for me to get over.
It's not like I'm going to harass the guy or anything. Live and let live. But he'll never get my support again, politically.
@rejahm: "Sorry, No. MSM can spin but they aren't entitled to their own facts." Sorry, no. The "biggest story" is about spin, not facts. Which Trump knows, if he knows anything. But he still has to execute. So far, the record is mixed.
I don't think he set up Cruz quite as deliberately as others imply, but he probably did think giving him a slot would unify the party: if Ted plays nice, his faction falls in line; if Ted plays Ted, he unifies the establishment and Trumpkins in disgust. Scenario 2 played out, but it is still a distraction.
The only time you get to break a pledge is if it was forced. Ted's pledge wasn't forced. No one put a gun to his head.
Trump lying.... What else did you expect. He knew very well what Cruz was going to say and wanted to use it to his advantage.
Sanders and Hillary not so different? Hillary and Donald not so different.
Hmmmm. Same thing he accuses Hillary of. Hmmmmm
Vicki from Pasadena
Trump gets to look magnanimous and reasonable - he allowed Cruz to speak even knowing he wouldn't endorse. Compare Hillary--she wouldn't even engage in another debate with Bernie, she had to deny him any airtime.
It probably would have played better if Trump had some of his people talk to the Media before the speech to set the expectation that Cruz wouldn't endorse (that way the story COULDN'T be "what a huge surprise/unexpected slight"), but otherwise it's not a bad move, for Trump.
Lucky Donald. Who knew Cruz would implode of his own volition.
Also - salesmanship, self-confidence, certitude, and bluster are core Trump traits--if you support him you can roll that into self-assurance/confidence and if you dislike him you can call it unwarranted arrogance, but that's his public persona either way. He can't afford to be seen as afraid, especially not of someone he's already defeated (like Cruz). It would be fatal to his image! He has to project strength.
Trump ain't scared!
Cruz said: vote your conscience, vote for the candidates whom you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.
Why would Trump supporters be mad at that? Because they know full well Trump is none of those things, but they're voting for him anyway. They need to keep popping psychological painkillers to dull the sensation. Cruz didn't make any criticisms of Trump. He didn't have to because everyone knows what Trump is, and that he is not trustworthy, will not defend our freedom or be faithful to the Constitution.
I know exactly which candidate for president is that person, and I expect to vote for him in November. If everyone who actually believed in Liberty and the Constitution did... but they won't. They are too afraid that a man they hate and don't want to be president might lose (???)
There is some crazy like a fox level delusions here.
Clearly, Cruz will in November either be:
-voting for Gary Johnson
-voting for Trump under duress, but refuse to admit it to anyone, even himself if he can help it
-only voting for down-ticket races
I suppose we'll never know which but I would be very interested in which it is.
Trump is masterful. There was no downside to inviting Cruz to speak at the convention without a demand that Cruz endorse Trump.
1) Trump looks generous and magnanimous. Trump wins.
2) Cruz sucks it up and endorses Trump or at least goes for the party unity--let's get Hillary speech. Cruz looks like a graceful loser, the party is better off, stronger going into the election...... and Trump wins
3) Ted does what he just did and looks disloyal, oath breaking and alienates everyone except the most rabid Cruz supporters and ends his own political future. Trump wins.
In all scenarios, Trump comes out on top. The art of the deal....indeed.
Worst part for Cruz - I guarantee he won't even get "strange new respect" from the Media.
No gain.
"This is about Ted Cruz."
Indeed as nobody is talking about TrumpPence today.
Oops!
Asking whether Trump is lying is redundant. It's harder to find cases where he's honest.
He's saving face here--no way he would have let Cruz speak if he didn't think he'd get an endorsement--certainly not a prime, Wednesday night speaking slot. If he had suspected this, he should have had a plan, like walking on stage at the end of the speech to spin it as a win. Instead, all the booing and anger from Team Trump made them look like they saw this as a very big deal. Very sloppy!
Hunter said...Cruz said: vote your conscience, vote for the candidates whom you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.
Why would Trump supporters be mad at that?
As I'm sure you know, Hunter, the phrase "vote your conscience" was used as a rallying cry by NeverTrump people who attempted to change the rules and unbind delegates in an effort to prevent Trump's nomination. Cruz's use of that same phrase was (correctly) interpreted by the crowd--it wasn't really a dog whistle so much as a lightly-coded message. But you knew that.
Cruz didn't sell out. I have nothing but respect for him.
For crying out loud, if a guy makes an entire speech about the importance of Republicans, and the importance of conservatism and the importance of patriotism and the importance of the Constitution, then says to vote for a candidate who is all about those things--and you take that as meaning "don't vote for our candidate"--then it says plenty about what you think about your own candidate. The people maddest at Cruz are likely those who are voting for Trump against their better judgment, because Cruz gets to look principled and they look like kissups trying to hold onto relevance.
"Cruz didn't sell out. I have nothing but respect for him."
I can't fault the guy either. He stood up for his wife and father--it's not as though Trump ever apologized (something Trump fans see as a feature, not a bug). And ultimately, told voters to vote for certain values. Not his problem if Trump's voters don't think Trump encapsulates any of those values.
Blogger damikesc said...
Cruz didn't sell out. I have nothing but respect for him.
A sell out is someone who sells out their principles for some other gain. Like say, not keeping a pledge in order to position yourself for a future presidential run. Or perhaps not keeping your pledge because you want to white knight for your wife.
How many of the general election voters have a positive view of Ted Cruz? That squishy middle voter everyone talks about is now hearing how the extremely conservative guy won't endorse DJT. Almost all of us conservatives will vote for trump anyways.
How does this hurt trump?
Anyway I think you have to interpret this as Cruz's declaration that he believes Trump will lose by a lot. If Trump loses by a little I'm not sure what future Cruz could have. If Trump wins Cruz might be a good candidate for a "coming into the fold" story, but that'd only work if Trump forgives...not too sure about that one.
Blogger Brando said...
For crying out loud, if a guy makes an entire speech about the importance of Republicans, and the importance of conservatism and the importance of patriotism and the importance of the Constitution, then says to vote for a candidate who is all about those things--and you take that as meaning "don't vote for our candidate"--then it says plenty about what you think about your own candidate.
It's not what we think, it's hat Cruz thinks. If you tell your audience, vote for the person who believes X, and then don't follow that up with, and Trump believes X, well, we aren't stupid hillbillies like Democrats wants you to believe.
We can put two and two together.
It's sorta cute though that you think you're defending Cruz while insulting us with this cheap line.
I read the speech – Cruz attacked Clinton and Obama and explained in detail why they do not reflect the values Republicans believe in. He then implores Republicans NOT to stay home. Even without an official endorsement of Trump, Cruz left a sizable opening for Trump to capitalize on Cruz’s speech to unify the party. All he needed to do was to say something to the effect of:
“Ted Cruz delivered a wonderful speech at the convention and I agree 100% - Hillary Clinton is not fit to be President and Republicans cannot afford to stay home. As your presidential nominee, I call on every Republican, independent and honorable Democrat to join me and Ted Cruz in working to elect all of our Republican candidates on the ballot this November.”
The welfare of the country trumps personal affront. Hillary is antithetical to the welfare of the country.
More importantly, Cruz professes to be a devout Christian. His bad form contradicted Christian doctrines about forgiving and "turning the other cheek," doctrines I believe are applicable in this situation.
Cruz had my support and my money until he left the race. Never again.
Was nice of Trump not to refer to him as Lyin' Ted in that tweet.
I'm very moved by many on the left with their newfound interests in the well being of Trump's political career. Sad they are, that Trump let it all slip away by letting Cruz speak knowing he wasn't going to endorse him.
Yes, in the eyes of the left he could have been a hero, if only for a moment. But, Trump let it all slip away. Now, he's back to being the bumbling idiot they knew he was all along.
Do you really think there is no one more vile, more evil than Hitler?
These same people decrying Trump for not stopping Cruz would have certainly educated us all if Trump had refused to let Cruz speak last night.
The people maddest at Cruz are likely those who are voting for Trump against their better judgment, because Cruz gets to look principled and they look like kissups trying to hold onto relevance.
Exactly.
For crying out loud, if a guy makes an entire speech about the importance of Republicans, and the importance of conservatism and the importance of patriotism and the importance of the Constitution, then says to vote for a candidate who is all about those things--and you take that as meaning "don't vote for our candidate"--then it says plenty about what you think about your own candidate. The people maddest at Cruz are likely those who are voting for Trump against their better judgment, because Cruz gets to look principled and they look like kissups trying to hold onto relevance.
This. The thing about so many Republican activists is for about the last sixteen years there has been an intense loathing of Hillary Clinton. It’s a testament to how awful a candidate Donald Trump is that these same people aren’t ready to crawl across a football field of broken glass to help get him elected. Cruz just laid out a perfect case for why Republicans shouldn’t stay home (as too many did in 2012) and let Hillary Clinton get elected President (which means electing Donald Trump as the only other viable option) but because he didn’t kiss the Donald’s ring, they’re acting like he did something beyond the pale. You know, like calling someone’s wife ugly or accusing their father of trying to murder JFK.
More importantly, Cruz professes to be a devout Christian. His bad form contradicted Christian doctrines about forgiving and "turning the other cheek," doctrines I believe are applicable in this situation.
Cruz turned the other cheek when his wife was insulted. Then the Donald followed up by suggesting that Cruz’s father was part of a plot to murder JFK. The only “cheeks” that Cruz has left are on his behind which anyone who impugns his faith are now invited to kiss.
Now let me see. A retweeted picture of earthy and self contained Melania next to a picture of Cruz's wife upset with her philandering DC insider she wanted to divorce and has forgiven, and that is beyond the pale. The truth hurts.
And a picture of the Prophet Rafael, most recently playing the role of a God man calling out to evangelicals to defeat Trump, seen in an earlier incarnation playing the role of a CIA run Cuban political activist, and is beyond the pale. The truth hurts.
hombre said...
More importantly, Cruz professes to be a devout Christian. His bad form contradicted Christian doctrines about forgiving and "turning the other cheek," doctrines I believe are applicable in this situation.
I seem to remember Jesus saying something about oaths. Cruz probably shouldn't have sworn an oath he might not be able to keep.
Otherwise, the claim Cruz showed "bad form" is mystifying to me. Cruz didn't say one bad thing about Trump, or not to vote for him. If voting Trump agrees with your conscience, if you think Trump represents the defense of Liberty and the Constitution, then Cruz was telling you to vote Trump.
The problem is every actual conservative knows it doesn't, and knows he doesn't. If you're a grudgingly dutiful Trump voter, any reminder of that is a tweak to your conscience, and you don't like it. It stings.
"Sanctimonious on-stage preening". Well, you will get either Donald Trump's uncontrolled outbursts and bullying, or Hillary's politburo drone and cackle. You were always voting vag.
"How does this hurt trump?"
Good question ie Trump's unfavorables are already soooo damn low, probably can't go any lower.
ok, I may be underestimating Trump!
eric said...
It's not what we think, it's hat Cruz thinks. If you tell your audience, vote for the person who believes X, and then don't follow that up with, and Trump believes X, well, we aren't stupid hillbillies like Democrats wants you to believe.
We can put two and two together.
And you are still free to vote for a person who is in opposition to most of those beliefs. It's Ted Cruz's fault for acknowledging the reality of that? And you are mad at him because you want to think better of your choice than reality and reason suggest you should.
Thorely Winston - @ 11:47
Perfect.
It's Ted Cruz's fault for acknowledging the reality of that?
Not at all. I was responding to Brando who is plagiarising the current Ted Cruz supporters talking points.
I loved Ted Cruz speech, all the way to the end where he didn't endorse Trump and tried to be too clever by half. I supported Ted Cruz.
But now, because he is butt hurt over the election, he is trying to help Hillary win for his own self interest.
No thanks.
"It's not what we think, it's hat Cruz thinks. If you tell your audience, vote for the person who believes X, and then don't follow that up with, and Trump believes X, well, we aren't stupid hillbillies like Democrats wants you to believe."
Why should anyone care what Cruz really meant when his words and the fact that he's speaking at Trump's convention (presumably at Trump's sufferance) could easily be interpreted as support for Trump? (At least if you believe Trump stands for the values Cruz favored, which Trump at least sometimes claims to stand for himself). If simply leaving out "oh yeah, and Trump is the guy you should vote for" undoes all of that, then it's sort of revealing of what Trump fans think of their guy.
Hell, if my wife spoke at a birthday event on my behalf, and all her words were to the tune of "there's nothing I love more than a good man" but never says my name, and then I start thinking "she must mean some other man!" then that's more my own issue than hers.
"Not at all. I was responding to Brando who is plagiarising the current Ted Cruz supporters talking points."
Plagiarizing, eh? Is that Team Trump's strategy of the day? Change the meaning of plagiarism as the latest defense of Melania's Monday speech?
11:52: 'The only “cheeks” that Cruz has left are on his behind which anyone who impugns his faith are now invited to kiss.'
There's a bit of a stretch, Thorley. Cruz neither forgave nor turned the other cheek in either instance and still hasn't.
But thanks for the input. I'm sure Cruz would be pleased to know the sippy cup Christians are still in his corner.
The Bronx Cheers for Lyin' Ted were arranged by a Bronx boy. If Pence was arranging things, it would have been a polite golf clap. If Gingrich was arranging things the speech,would never have stopped.
Let's see-
Trump offers Cruz a prime time speaking slot,and Cruz accepted.
Cruz brought a rope to the Convention, and used it to hang himself.
Pundits: Wow!! That Dastardly Trump set a trap and sprung it brilliantly!
Hunter 12:02: 'Otherwise, the claim Cruz showed "bad form" is mystifying to me.'
I see now it was wrong of me to suggest that after Trump's nomination it was bad form for Cruz to rehash speeches from his losing campaign, repeat a slogan used by the "stop Trump" crybabies and pointedly refuse to endorse Trump despite chants from the crowd requesting he do so. After all, last night was all about Cruz and his hard feelings. Right?
And: "And you are mad at him because you want to think better of your choice than reality and reason suggest you should."
Let's see, the choice is between Trump the blowhard, the inept Queen of the Grifters and some douchenozzle running as a spoiler calling himself a Libertarian. What is there "to think better of?"
You obviously have an overblown view of your own insight and Cruz's importance to the process.
Blogger Brando said...
"Not at all. I was responding to Brando who is plagiarising the current Ted Cruz supporters talking points."
Plagiarizing, eh? Is that Team Trump's strategy of the day? Change the meaning of plagiarism as the latest defense of Melania's Monday speech?
What do you call it when you all are repeating the same lines?
It's obvious to me that Cruz was absolutely convinced he was going to be the nominee, thus his promises were meaningless. Cruz is pissed that he lost and stumped as to why. He completely fails to see that, unlike most politicians, getting to know him is to dislike him.
As I said in another post, we've all worked with people like Cruz--convinced they are the smartest person in the room, but really are just full of shit and who can't actually do their job, but can endlessly talk about how allegedly good they are at it. They are bullies, yet when challenged in any substantial way, they are the first to scream "I'm being oppressed."
The bottom line is that Cruz broke his word. That makes him despicable.
"What do you call it when you all are repeating the same lines?"
I don't even know what lines the Cruz team is putting out--far as I know, he just said "when he came after my wife and father I decided not to follow the pledge". I'm looking at this mostly from the point of how incompetent Team Trump looks in this.
Now Hillary is tweeting, "Vote your conscience" and black lives matter protesters are carrying signs, "Vote your conscience - Ted Frustrated"
How the left loves Republicans when they attack other Republicans.
Cruz, stepped up to the podium and talked about principles and conscience. Now he admits he was motivated by hurt feelings. So Cruz was every inch a hypocrite, wasting everybody’s time at home and the convention. No one want to hear the message of “people, do what I say—vote your conscience” from someone who is hiding what he’s really up to—vengefully acting on a grudge.
Brando said...
"What do you call it when you all are repeating the same lines?"
I don't even know what lines the Cruz team is putting out-
Who said anything about the Cruz team? This is from NeverTrump.
It starts here https://theweek.com/articles/637539/why-ted-cruzs-huge-convention-gamble-pay-end
And you all are plagiarising it.
@ThorleyW: "Cruz just laid out a perfect case for why Republicans shouldn’t stay home (as too many did in 2012) and let Hillary Clinton get elected President (which means electing Donald Trump as the only other viable option)" If he had made that "perfect" case, and said something like "you know what this means, right?" instead of "vote your conscience," all would be well all around. But he didn't. And his comments this morning confirm why. Hence he seriously messed up the "case."
I don't know how my phone made Ted Cruz above into Ted Frustrated.
Anyway, should have read Ted Cruz.
Trump faced two decisions given Cruz wasn't going to endorse him explicitly- either deny Cruz the slot, or let Cruz do what he did. The second choice is the superior one, by a wide margin. If there is criticism to be leveled, it might be directed at arranging to have Cruz booed and heckled, but I am not convinced that it was arranged despite some of the reports- the audience there isn't stupid or politically naive, they knew what Cruz was doing.
While Trump has tweeted negatively about Cruz this morning, what really matters is tonight's speech. I suspect the big tent will be opened, and you might even find Trump offering an apology of sorts to Cruz and others he defeated along the way. It has certainly been staged that way, in any case. Now to see if it follows through.
"And you all are plagiarising it."
Well, if I managed a word for word copying that would be a feat. But a thousand monkeys at a thousand typewriters...
"How the left loves Republicans when they attack other Republicans."
Of course--they'd be nuts not to. But Team Trump decided "vote your conscience" means "don't vote Trump" and that's what makes this a gift. Hell, to Newt's credit, he tried to spin it, but the Trump supporters never got the memo.
Spinning it that way, Brando, might not work- you need Cruz to agree with the spin afterwards. Cruz made it clear before the speech, according to Cruz, and after speech, again according to Cruz himself, that he explicitly was not endorsing the nominee. In this, it is the implicit version of what George Will made explicit a few weeks back.
I am not convinced booing Cruz off the stage was the right approach, but I don't think it is damaging either. Much depends on the speech tonight. Trump could go small-hearted- that would be a mistake since this is the biggest audience he will have to date.
I thought Tuesday night Trump, when they were live streaming him from Trump Tower, said "have a good time tomorrow and I'll see you on Thursday." I wonder if he was still in NYC, saw the copy of the speech, and decided to jet over to the convention?
Cruz was doing fine and receiving a courteous and respectful listening by the audience who clapped at the appropriate times......UNTIL.....he went with the "vote your conscience" line. THEN the audience became aware that his speech wasn't about the party, about party unity, or really even about the Democrats. It was all about Cruz.
The mantra "vote your conscience" is the one that the Never Trump and pro Cruz delegates were using in order to attempt a coup and overturn the established rules of the Convention. To UNbind the delegates who were bound by the rules to vote on the first ballot by each State's rules. The idea of "vote your conscience" was that the delegates should be able to vote for whomever they want, DESPITE, what the voters in their districts or states decided. The Never Trump people LOST their bid or their coup.
It was no accident that Cruz used that exact phrase. He was basically saying vote and vote for ME!!!
Everyone in the audience knew this and that was the basis for their objections and booing. He didn't have to endorse Trump or kiss Trump's ring. All Cruz needed to do was to fulfill his oath to support the party nominee.
He broke his pledge, he asked people to vote for HIM or to vote against the party nominee. Ted Cruz is a slimeball.
"Spinning it that way, Brando, might not work- you need Cruz to agree with the spin afterwards. Cruz made it clear before the speech, according to Cruz, and after speech, again according to Cruz himself, that he explicitly was not endorsing the nominee. In this, it is the implicit version of what George Will made explicit a few weeks back."
Cruz could do that--but it still could have played to Trump's favor if he took the "I'll take it as an endorsement" approach. By jumping up on stage with him, offering his hand, saying "you bet you should vote your conscience! And I'm our best chance to keep crooked Hillary out of office!" the chief takeaway would have been Trump going for unity, and Cruz being petty (if he still said "no I didn't endorse! That's not what I meant!"
Compare it to Sanders' "damn emails" comment at a Dem debate--those words, as they were, could have meant "I think this is a nothing scandal and I'm tired of hearing about it!" and it could have meant "I'm tired of all these scandals you keep getting into, crook!" Hillary chose to treat it like the former (saying "me too! ha ha ha cackle") and so Sanders would have had to run against the cheering tide and look petty if he said "no I meant you're a crook!" She spun it that way, and the media followed right along. If instead she took the Trump route, she could have gone for the latter (tired of you being a crook) interpretation, gotten defensive and kept the issue alive early on (and alienated more Sanders people).
Yes, Brando, Trump probably would have been damned smart to do exactly what you suggest- he can still do that tonight, though- that window is wide open, and with a much, much larger audience.
Cruz committed suicide last night roflmao.
He's the only one left in either party with the balls to stand up and say - even indirectly, and very tamely, as he did last night - that their candidate is a shitshow.
The sheer hypocrisy on display is rofl too, Trump trashed his sacred oath and it's okay because people were mean to him, but Cruz does what he said he would, not endorse Trump, because Trump said despicable things about his wife and father, and omg what a narcissist so terrible breaking his word!
Give me a break. Trump is a child and he's taking the GOP nowhere whether he wins or loses in November. In 4 years Republicans are going to want someone who is competent at more than master trolling.
DBQ, what are you talking about? People started yelling halfway through the speech, "ENDORSE TRUMP!"
They weren't even listening.
"Yes, Brando, Trump probably would have been damned smart to do exactly what you suggest- he can still do that tonight, though- that window is wide open, and with a much, much larger audience. "
That would be quite the coup--after a week like this, all attention on his big final speech, and he actually has a thought out compelling argument for why skeptics should come down on his side, and why he would make a fine president. If he can do that, most of this week's problems will be forgotten.
I'll have a few beers cold for it either way.
Vote your Conscience.
Just remember that if you don't vote for Donald Trump, or you don't vote for any president, or you vote some third party token candidate, you'll be responsible for two, possibly three leftist Supreme Court justices and the irreparable harm to the fabric of our society that will result.
"Just remember that if you don't vote for Donald Trump, or you don't vote for any president, or you vote some third party token candidate, you'll be responsible for two, possibly three leftist Supreme Court justices and the irreparable harm to the fabric of our society that will result."
If Trump loses to Hillary, the fault lies with Trump that he could not beat the second most unpopular person ever nominated by either party.
I was a little disappointed. It struck me as more petty than noble.
The silver lining is that Cruz will have Trump in his sights if he gets elected and promotes egregious policies. Yet another reason for me not to fear a Trump presidency.
I think the discontent of the grassroots is still being underestimated, and Trump is doing a decent job of being an avatar for that discontent. Ryan and Cruz might have reelection problems.
I still think Hillary is a stalking horse. At some point she will bow out and we'll end up with President Ash Carter or some such.
"If Trump loses to Hillary, the fault lies with Trump that he could not beat the second most unpopular person ever nominated by either party."
No, it means the American voter prefers Hillary. It's no more complicated than that.
I believe this election campaign cycle will end during the Democrat convention when Hillary is nominated. Most people have already decided which way to vote. I believe of ACTUAL voters the relatively few undecideds will be persuaded more by how the immediate response of Hillary and Donald to the crisis of the week than any campaigning they do.
I also firmly believe that had Cruz won the nomination, he would have lost in a landslide (though more a Carter than McGovern loss.)
@Brando said...
If Trump loses to Hillary, the fault lies with Trump that he could not beat the second most unpopular person ever nominated by either party.
Or we can blame the one-eyed, one-eared, Trump insufferable supporters who have ignored the low character of their candidate for more than a year and who would not question the brash actor's insults and bad judgments for the past year but not likely forever.
"If Trump is elected President", [Trump ghostwriter Tony Schwartz] ... warned, “the millions of people who voted for him and believe that he represents their interests will learn what anyone who deals closely with him already knows - that he couldn’t care less about them.”
Don't make promises you don't intend.
I'll still consider supporting Cruz in the future if he looks like the best man to rep. my interests. But there are obvious consequences to breaking a promise and being a dick while you do it.
gadly, let me correct your quote:
"If [fill in the blank] is elected, the [scary number] of people who voted for him/her/it and believe that he/she/it represents their interests will learn what anyone who deals closely with him/her/it already knows - that he/she/it couldn’t care less about them.”
"But there are obvious consequences to breaking a promise"
Given that Trump himself broke the pledge before he knew he'd be the nominee, in what possible moral universe is Cruz even slightly, remotely beholden to keep it himself? The outrageous slanders about his wife and father *are* relevant and would have excused him IMO (not even Hillary has, to my knowledge, leveled a slime as incredible as "my opponent's father conspired to kill an ex President") but it's unnecessary to even argue about it, Trump "broke the promise" *first*. Please lay out for me the moral logic that results in Cruz still being beholden to endorse Trump when Trump flat out said he would not endorse Cruz had Cruz won.
In fact, in what moral universe are all the people screaming at Cruz for "breaking his promise" NOT being insane hypocrites for giving Trump a pass for breaking the promise first?
"He broke his pledge, he ... is a slimeball."
Still waiting to hear how Trump, who broke the pledge first, *isn't* a slimeball, but Cruz is.
Whatever Pledge Cruz made, it became moot when Trump said--after the pledges were made--the things he said. A man calls you a liar--fighting words. A man insults your woman--fighting words. A man insults your father--fighting words. Cruz said, "Fuck You!" a lot more eloquently than I would have. Cruz knew it would be political suicide. He may not even be reelected senator in Texas. Doesn't care. Principles. How strange in this society that is.
Roll over "for the good of the party"? Many of you have been whining/bitching/threatening about the GOP establishment all damn year--forever even--and how they won't stand up for "our principles." Now they are for Trump, but that's a good thing, not a suspicious thing. Why, everyone should "support the party's candidate!" Oh, but only Trump can stand up and fight for anything, and it's ok no matter what he says about your momma's army boots, or your sister's cock sucking. He's a fighter! He wins! He tells it like it is!
No. Apparently, he's not the only one who can say what he wants. The difference is, Cruz knew it would cost a heavy price. Trump knows he can say anything, "even kill someone in Times Square, and it won't matter with his followers." That's also how it is with Hillary. Huh! That may mean something.
Well, "Cruz is angling for 2020." Or, "Trump knew it would work in his favor." Etc. etc. etc.
Most of you/us are such cynics, you/we don't even know it. In fact, you think it's a virtue, a sign of intelligence. It is not. It is another in a long list of the tsunami of decadence washing over us through and through as a society. Rather than reject it, we waller in it. We LIKE it. Aren't we all so clever?
No. We are sick.
The Constitution. Liberty. Freedom. Whatever.
Pence was really the biggest story.
The more I see of Pence the more I like him.
WSJ front page this morning: GOP Party Unity Cracks.
Wishful thinking. Consider their track record on this campaign – wrong about everything so far. And we’re supposed to listen to them on this? When the WSJ references “party unity” they are talking about just one disunited group: NeverTrumpers.
But the NeverTrumpers, what’s left of them, are and always were a small group and are becoming more insignificant by the hour.
Kasich, the popular Governor of Ohio refused to attend the convention and has vilified Trump to anyone who would listen every day of the convention. But Trump is tied with Hillary in Ohio. Without spending a penny on ads.
Despite Trump paying lip service to “party unity” for public consumption the plain truth is that Trump doesn’t need them and that’s what is really bothering them.
I thought that brand of anti-establishmentarianism was what the Trumpkins liked.
As I’ve said before, I like Cruz. He has a fine legal mind. I would like him on the SCOTUS. And it is certainly true that Trump acted badly during the prior episode about the wives and the father. So I do not blame Cruz for the non-endorsement. It is understandable to this Trumpkin that Cruz would hate Trump’s guts. It is the way I would probably react.
So I kind of feel sorry for Cruz. I think he may have hurt his political career but no matter what he did he was screwed. Might as well get his licks in.
Well, "Cruz is angling for 2020."
No chance in hell. I'd say Pence has a good shot, though.
Trump could pinch a loaf in public - and in fact he has many times - and Althouse would respond with a giant block quote from the Dilbert guy explaining why this was a brilliant communications strategy. But Cruz stands on principle and explains why, and to Alhouse that's "sanctimonious preening."
Peculiar woman.
"No chance in hell."
Cruz never had a chance anyway.
The Constitution and Freedom just ain't what they used to be.
That ain't what we're about anymore. Hence, the choices we've got. The choices we've made.
Who will take care of us? That's the Question of our Age.
Who will take care of us? That's the Question of our Age.
When a nanny state 'takes care of' both Big Business and the indigent, the state tends to know what side its bread is buttered on.
He was just like director Comey. He laid out the argument for why we shouldn't elect Hillary and then he says, vote your conscience. Just like Comey lays out all the reasons Hillary should be indicted and then says she shouldn't be.
He doesn't trust Trump. He doesn't feel that he is a conservative. So, he won't say "vote for him". He will say "Don't vote for her". Because if Trump does what a lot of people fear he will do, Cruz doesn't want to be the one to answer "Well, why did you endorse him then?"
From the perspective of making nice with the Republican Establishment, I think humiliating Cruz on prime time was worth a lot of nasty comments to the Establishment. And the non-Establishment. One hears repeatedly that his colleagues in the Senate absolutely loathe Cruz.
Ironically, the base despises most of the Senate.
McCain doesn't like Cruz? Good. McCain is shit.
Simple question: If Trump didn't win, would he have endorsed anybody?
Cruz didn't either.
A sell out is someone who sells out their principles for some other gain. Like say, not keeping a pledge in order to position yourself for a future presidential run. Or perhaps not keeping your pledge because you want to white knight for your wife.
Like being a conservative first and foremost and endorsing somebody you view as not being conservative solely to keep yourself politically relevant in 2020 --- as if anybody will give a shit about this.
You know who had, with little argument, the worst on-stage speech of the entire 1988 DNC? Bill Clinton. His biggest applause line began "In closing". After that, his national career was over, right?
Nobody will remember this is in 2020. If Trump is an actual conservative, Cruz will endorse him then. If he isn't, Cruz can say "Told you so".
But now, because he is butt hurt over the election, he is trying to help Hillary win for his own self interest.
He attacked Hillary more in his speech than Trump has thus far.
In the end, people who have spent months bitching about politicians all being up for sale bitched that a politician who was not up for sale didn't get bought.
Re-watch Clinton's nomination speech of Dukakis in 1988. That was death on stage.
He recovered
He recovered
He did??
He did win the White House.
Twice.
And has his wife at the verge of winning it in spite of being a criminal.
So, yeah, he did.
He did win the White House.
LOL! I thought you meant Dukakis!
White knighting for a wife? Isn't that just being a good spouse?
This is getting unhinged.
"This is getting unhinged."
We are just getting started. Or rather, continuing a long slide into the abyss of unhingedness.
Soon there will be no door at all.
Hinges are vastly overrated.
"Hinges are vastly overrated."
So are doors. Welcome to Babylon.
Welcome to Babylon.
"And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird." Rev. 18:2
Chuck is a jagoff whether or not he pulls his pud.
STILL waiting to hear an explanation of how Cruz was obligated to endorse Trump because of a pledge that Trump himself broke first.
Seriously. I want to hear how that works. Because logically, morally, ethically, it's a crock of ahit so deep I would have previously thought only Democrats could come up with it.
Oh. Wait. I see.
I love the smell of seething lefties in the morning!
because of a pledge that Trump himself broke first
Trump didn't support the eventual winner of the Republican primaries?
Trump didn't support the eventual winner of the Republican primaries?
He said he wasn't going to months ago.
Cite?
You won't admit that first blood was drawn against Trump. His wife was the first attacked. Oh, not Cruz? Pull the other one. Rafael Cruz attacked Trump energetically, you don't strike back? And what, exactly, was he doing in photos with Oswald? Great explanation I'm sure, Ted, let's hear it-oh you quit? How sad.
That dad of his is a sorry piece of trash. Sad, it happens.
Cruz' own family can't stand him. You see them cringe.
Cruz, like his father, is a sorry piece of trash. I used to think he could be useful. Now I don't. Who could trust him?
Brando thinks that AA's stupid act is compelling and is trying to emulate it. Short answer: no, it's not.
Good, so chips, fall.
You won't admit that first blood was drawn against Trump.
I won't just fabricate stuff? Yup. Guilty here.
His wife was the first attacked. Oh, not Cruz?
Can you demonstrate it was Cruz? I've noticed that nobody has actually done it yet, but I wish you well in your efforts.
Rafael Cruz attacked Trump energetically, you don't strike back?
By saying he assisted with the assassination of JFK? Nah. I would avoid the bat shit crazy route personally. If Ivanka attacked Cruz, and he called her a Times Square whore, I'd call that wrong and insane also.
And what, exactly, was he doing in photos with Oswald?
So, again, you're putting forth that he was involved in the assassination.
Do you want me to go back into Trump's history and go over the people he took photos with? It'd be a target-rich environment.
That dad of his is a sorry piece of trash. Sad, it happens.
As are you. That's life.
Cruz' own family can't stand him. You see them cringe.
He never tried to grab his daughter's ass nor discuss how, if things were different, he'd date her.
Cruz, like his father, is a sorry piece of trash. I used to think he could be useful. Now I don't. Who could trust him?
Conservatives.
He didn't make himself a cuckold.
Can you make the same claim?
The only plus of this year is, should Trump lose, I can laugh at you. It'd be a shame and horrible if Hillary won --- but you being unhappy might make up for it.
I'd be happy to verbally tear you to shreds, but apparently you run screaming from the room now if I speak. Best to let be a sensitive soul like you. Oh, I see, I happened to reply to you on two threads running and you soiled yourself. Believe me, I didn't even consider who you were.
But again, I address the empty air-just as before, it seems.
You should put some ice on that.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा