The voters on both side are angry, that's why Sanders have so much support. I can understand people wanting to vote for Sanders, but it seems pretty odd to me that when right wing voters gets angry, they want Trump and Cruz.
Fine, I'm willing to concede Trump might be the nominee. Since forever, I've been thumbing my nose at the polls saying that when the chips were down and Republican primary voters had to cast a real ballot, they wouldn't cast for Trump. I disregarded New Hampshire as a quirky state. But I can't pretend any longer since he won South Carolina. I admit I was wrong (again, SamFisher will be happy to point out, I'm sure). Now, I'm emotionally conflicted. I'm embarrassed to be associated by citizenship with these Trump voters. I'm depressed at the prospect of a Trump-Clinton election where no good outcome is possible (actually, I've been depressed about the whole primary, which seemed to have no good candidates at all, including my least-bad option Bernie Sanders). But, I'm happy and hopeful that maybe possibly Ted Cruz -- possibly the only candidate worse for this country than Trump -- won't be president. And, of course, I'm enjoying the comedy of it all, though it is a sort of gallows humor.
Hey if Trump is president, we will have the richest president ever right? We will have one of the best looking first daughter ever, can she be secretary of state? We will already have many buildings named after the new president. :grin:
South Carolina voter education breakdown Spoiler http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-south-carolina-win-exit-polls-2016-2
I'm not asking this from a viewpoint of opposition, but rather from one in need of education (haven't read too much on Cruz). Why is Cruz the disaster that so many on both sides suggest he might be if he wins the White House?
He is willing to take down the whole country to make a point. He dislikes everyone, including Republicans in congress. He is a bigger threat to this country than Trump, now that is saying something.
That is indeed what I hear. But what are the specifics?? I try not to be like most posters in the D&D in that I'd like to have the policy specifics and historical context associated with a candidate as opposed to buzz word phrases that elicit emotional reactions.
They will never admit it in a forum like this, but they hate him because he is a proud and unapologetic Christian. Of course we have had literally dozens of Christian presidents over the course of our history. But they would apparently have you believe that we have no experience with Christians holding high office at all and that you therefore need to be deathly afraid of the fascism and inevitable theocracy that such a person would impose on our country. Of course this is raving anti-Christian nonsense which tells us a lot more about these haters of Ted Cruz than it does about Ted Cruz himself.
Lol, that is funny. Cruz was willing to let national debt go into default, that alone makes him unfit to be the president, I do not care what kind of reason he had.
Is he really? Didn't it show in his records that he doesn't tithe? I think Ted pretends to be a whole lot of things but it's hard to tell if he's really any of them or if he's just pretending to be them in order to get elected. He has a real authenticity problem that I don't think he can overcome.
This is straight comedic relief. The Cruz slurper that believes he is a good christian. If being a good christian equates to outright cheating and lying then sure.
IMO they are both pretty bad. I don't see how anyone could be excited to vote for anyone with an authenticity problem be it Cruz or Hillary. Even if what they are pretending to be was something that I disliked it would be better if they actually were what they bill themselves as. That's why I like Bernie as much as I do. He's legitimately exactly what he bills himself as. If a politician can't even be honest about simple stuff like who they are, why should anyone trust them with high office? Bottom line, Cruz is a the Republican version of Hillary. Just a complete fraud. Also, he's Canadian which IMO should make him ineligible to become president to begin with.
Foremost, it's because I believe he will do or say anything to have his way without regard to the moral or legal implications of his actions. I think he will be primarily preoccupied with aggrandizing his own power, and will walk over Congress, the Supreme Court, your civil rights, and anything else that gets in his way. As president, I think he will be completely inflexible and unwilling to compromise. He will bully Congress -- even when it is still majority Republican. I get this impression because of his rhetoric coming into his Senate office that he didn't come to make friends but to fight for his constituents. While most first-termers stay quiet and learn the ropes, he immediately started getting into fights with Senate colleagues. He pushed the country to the edge of default in his fight with Obama even though other Republicans had abandoned the strategy and it was clear his persisting was becoming counter-productive. And he always 'has to be right' and is always offering rationalizations for what he's done and refusing blame. He sent threatening letters to voters and refused to apologize, saying it was standard campaigning. He told caucus-goers that Ben Carson was dropping out to steal their support, and then pretended it was a simple misunderstanding. I don't think there's a single objective thing to point out (other than maybe the government shutdown), but his pattern of behavior sends up red flags all over the place. If my sister told me she was dating a guy that acted like this, I'd tell her to dump him. If my boss acted like this, I'd be looking for work -- and an employee who acted like he does would be out on his ass. If he showed up on my Facebook feed, I'd unfriend him. If that's how he conducts his business, I don't want to do business with him. I can't speak for everyone obviously. I wouldn't have a problem with him being a Christian. My wife is born-again, and if people know my posting history they know I usually ally with the church in arguments. But, I don't think he's a Christian. I think he's a sociopathic politician that knows the surest way to secure a support base for his conservative politics in Texas is to talk like a Christian. Maybe I do him a disservice to question his faith. But Peter says faith bears fruit. I don't see any fruit. I see a man with a lot of sin issues around pride, and in divisiveness and hatred and fear. That doesn't mean that he's not a Christian. Maybe he prays about those things every day in recognition of what a broken man he is. But, applying Occam's Razor, I think the likelier answer is that he's an ambitious tyrant who finds religion to be a convenient tool to use to increase his power. I see no sincerity in anything he does or says, even when he talks about God. That's probably unfair, but given his track record I can at least say I can never tell when he's genuine and when he's false, so I'm going with the default supposition that he's false.
You can never tell what someone is really thinking, but you can see what they do. If someone says they are Christian (that alone makes me suspicious) look for acts of humility and compassion. If you don't see that, it's faked for effect.
