Ted Cruz on the Paris attacks
[NOTE: I’m adding this video of Ted Cruz speaking on the Paris attacks, which I hadn’t yet seen when I wrote yesterday’s posts. I think it deserves a post of its own.]
I don’t know about you, but this is the man I would trust most to lead this fight. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t trust certain other Republican candidates, but no one holds a candle to Cruz in his combination of eloquence, firmness, intelligence, resolve, proven record of resolute action, and ability to understand concepts and state them with clarity. Cruz is an incredible combination of brains and character, and I fail to understand why he isn’t running away with the nomination in terms of support from conservatives:
[ADDENDUM: Looking at some of the comments, I want to add something I’ve been thinking about for quite some time: I find it astounding that many conservatives argue against Cruz (and for Trump) on the basis of “electability.” Many of those same people have been railing against the “electability” argument that they see many supporters of RINO/establishment candidates as having used for those candidates during past election cycles. I have read these criticisms for over a decade. Those same conservatives have argued that what they want is someone who can articulate consistent conservative principles, and that’s what matters to them. And yet many of those very same people refuse to support Cruz because of Trump’s theoretical “electability.”
By the way, if you look at the polls, there’s nothing whatsoever to support the notion that Trump is most electable. In fact, according to polls, he’s nearly the least electable of a not-so-very-electable bunch (Cruz is not on that particular chart, but he’s here, and his figures are somewhat similar to Trump’s).
Now, you can say that polls don’t matter, and certainly not at this point. And I would agree to a certain extent; right now Hillary has the advantage of huge name recognition and of being the obvious nominee of the Democrats. But if polls don’t tell the whole story, they certainly offer no support for an argument that Trump is most electable. I expect polls to change as the race narrows down and as time passes and unpredictable events occur, but as of now if you want an electable candidate in terms of the polls, go for Carson.
Oh, that’s right, a lot of you didn’t care about “electability.”
Anyone who reads this blog knows what I think of Trump. But right now I’m just speaking pragmatically about electability. I do care at least somewhat about electability, and I’ve yet to see any indication of Trump’s; au contraire. That’s hardly the only reason I’m against him, of course. But it’s one reason I find the electability argument of his supporters especially odd.]
Cruz-Carly. A winning ticket.
Cruz definitely has the Canadian Hispanic evangelical vote sewed up. Seriously, as one of the two or three best choices, he almost certainly won’t get the nomination.
The immigration thing is the problem. Cruz just modified his stance on H1_B (he would suspend it until abuses are corrected), but there is still doubt. He is a great debater, but lacks a Reaganesque warmth (see recent canadian election for value of a public likability).
Unfortunately only Trump has tapped into he great middle class revolt (and he won’t follow through). People who try to obey the laws and general rules of good behavior in society will be fined or jailed the instant we disobey. But favored groups would get their mortgages forgiven, illegal entry to the US excused or arrests forgiven. The supposed kindness to illegal immigrants is just another slap in the face of the working stiff. Cruz has to come to grips with this and support enforcement of laws first and foremost. After regaining the trust of citizens, then the government can start carefully and legally granting favors
A lot of the establishment has been working overtime to convince us that he is not electable; the field is still too big; drain off of some support by Carson; people aren’t as bright as we’d like them to be.
I agree with your praise of Cruz. However, I think Trump pulled a lot of conservatives who like his bombastic venting and ignore whether Trump could win the general election. I think and hope that Rubio would be good at attracting diverse segments of middle-of-the-road voters, whom I think find Cruz unappealing.
Cruz cites a frightening statistic: that 77% of the Muslim refugees arriving in Europe are men of military age. He calls that a strange demographic.
It is not entirely strange: had someone been checking the age and sex of migrants fleeing from the US to Canada at the height of the Vietnam draft, it would likely have been similar.
That tells you all you need to know.
And it is not to minimize Cruz’ statement. He is absolutely right on.
So you think that these “migrants” are Syrian draft dodgers?
I like Cruz better than Trump, but I thought the shut down, Cruz’s brain child, was a terrible idea politically – whether you’re right or not, it matters if you leave yourself wide open to losing politically. I’ve never heard him accept responsibility or walk back on that, so I wonder if he’s an effective politician who learns from experience or is someone who can widen the conservative tent.
I want to stay principled, but I believe that there are quite a few people who would be at least moderately conservative, if they weren’t subject to NPR/broadcast brainwashing. It’s not just the likability with Cruz, although it’s related to it. I feel like he doesn’t try to show people how he affiliates with their interests and invite them to affiliate with him. He’s got his principles – take them or leave them. In some ways, this is admirable. But, in other ways, not sure it produces converts and we need converts.
Reagan was principled, but he made conservatism about common sense in living and something that applied to most people most of the time. There was a mood of, “if you’re not against us, you’re with us.” With Cruz, the mood, to me, appears the opposite, “if you’re not with us, you’re against us.” We have to build a MAJORITY. We have to GET THE MOST VOTES.
Saw some talking head on FNC state that Lindsey Graham should get another look because he has been talking tough about ISIL the longest. Oh, please.
Cruz is in my top 3 of those who are still standing. I do not care about warm and fuzzy, Intelligent, competent, tough are the descriptions I am looking for. And, of course, someone who actually believes in the constitution.
If Trump has not killed his chances with recent tirades in Iowa, then not enough people are actually paying attention. I don’t think there has been anyone on the national stage–at least in modern times–who is as gross and mean spirited as he is. I have called him a buffoon. My wife says that the definition of buffoon doesn’t fit; so I will call him a “Lout”. (Look it up) We do not need a “Lout in Chief”.
The Republican establishment *has* been working hard to destroy Cruz’s credibility as a “serious” candidate, and there’s a little more to it than that, even. As an elected Republican, at this point, I think many of the Trump supporters assume that he *will* be shoved aside by the establishment at some point, no matter what.
What you’re seeing is not a rejection of Cruz, but conservatives refusing to get suckered, again. Conservatives may prefer Cruz, but they know from experience that because he is working within the party’s rules, he is highly vulnerable. Cruz will do especially well in the primaries in Texas, WHICH IS WHY the party establishment will GUARANTEE he does not make it that far.
It hurts me to have to say this, because Cruz is definitely my guy. He’s my senator, and by all rights he should be the candidate the party rallies around. But if conservatives rally around him now, he’s history. The Republican establishment is not our friend; they are the party of Boehner, not Reagan. They want to please the entrenched, left-leaning media. They want to “compromise” with Obama’s Democrats, meaning they have little interest in pursuing anything their own constituents desire. Sans Trump, Cruz would be taking a DAILY pounding from the combined forces of press and party. It won’t matter how smart he is, or how capable, or how right he is for the job. All we’d hear every day are the QUESTIONS, the never-ending QUESTIONS. Canada, Canada, Canada! Who’s he sleeping with? Look at what we found in his trash! Let’s misconstrue things he said twenty years ago!
Sans Trump, the primary choice for Texas this time would be between Jeb! and Kasich. Screw that. Trump support has already cost Jeb! his stupid coronation, so we’re already seeing results. If not for Trump, Jeb! would be the party’s pick, we wouldn’t get any say, and we’d have to watch the whole kabuki theater AGAIN, where the Republican party presents the nation with a woefully unelectable “electable” squish whose entire sales pitch relies on rejecting his base and trying to convince people who think Republicans are satan to switch their votes. Jeb! would be the Republican party’s guarantee that we would get our first openly socialist president ever, whether it’s madman Sanders or repugnant harridan Hillary.
As bad as Trump’s negatives are, they don’t come close to approaching the flat-out catastrophe of a Bernie Sanders presidency. And I believe that the Trump shake-up can wind up *improving* Cruz’s chances. What’s more, I think Cruz himself knows that. If the electorate can be sure the establishment is neutered, and there’s no chance of shoving Cruz aside for Kasich, you might see a rally. Trump may even start pulling out of the race by that time. And even if he doesn’t, a Trump-Cruz ticket would probably lead to an administration where the VP for once is doing most of the really heavy lifting, while the pres is content to be on TV all the time.
Neo, why do you think that Cruz has character? I frankly never thought of him in those terms. Not that I think he lacks character, either. I just don’t see him on that axis. He has consistency, which can indicate character, but just as easily indicate stubbornness, or lack of creativity, or other negative traits. Don’t get me wrong: I’d vote for him eagerly in the general, and comfortably in the primary. It’s just, what do you see that I don’t?
Neo:
I fail to understand why he isn’t running away with the nomination…
The main reason is that he is simply not likable. I’ve said here previously that certain things he’s done, like reversing himself and opposing the trade deal at the last minute, show political calculation placed above principle. And let’s face it, he is lousy at being a politician having alienated most of the Republican Senators. Beside the useless government shutdown, what has he accomplished in the not quite 3 years he’s been in Washington?
There is just something about him that is disingenuous. Having said that, I’d vote for him in a second. He would make a fine VP choice for another candidate, a great Attorney General, and an exceptional Supreme Court Justice. But he will not get my vote in the primary.
Judith,
I think you have a point about Cruz, but I wonder if he is in some way trying to hold back to avoid becoming a flavor of the month. Like his holding back on Trump, maybe he thinks it’s smarter to let Trump self destruct. Maybe the time will come when he feels he can open up more to people. Right now he is attracting support because of his brains and principles. He will have to show other Reps that he is willing to be part of a team and work with others to get his proposals through. The shutdown maneuvers certainly attracted public attention, but he needs to convince others that he is capable of also being a tactician. I think he will also need to build some foreign connections to wipe out Hillary’s claim to be the foreign poloic expert.
I am impressed by his intelligence. He makes Obama look more like a Head Starter than even a JV team when it comes to governance.
I see an extremely intelligent and extremely principled man in Cruz.
Obviously he is too intelligent and too principled for many, including some commenters here.
Based on what one can actually know about any of these folks, I believe Cruz is sincere and I agree with his Conservative principles. I have two big concerns with him; no Executive experience (and not much Congressional experience) and he is hated within his own party. Yes, there was a significant part of the Republican party that hated Reagan, but I don’t thnk that’s anything like the hatred of Cruz. If Cruz were elected President I think many, many Republicans would work against him. With all Democrats doing the same it’s hard to imagine a good outcome.
It reminds me of Lincoln; who had as many eneimies in his own party as in the opposition party.
I don’t think Republicans are right to hate him, but they do. Look at how many usually stoic party figureheads have been willing to make very public and very vitriolic statements against Cruz.
I think Trump would be a much bigger disaster than Cruz (Yuge!), but, unless there is a drastic change in Republican Party attitude and approach, it is hard to imagine a President Cruz finding anyone willing to work with him.
The Other Chuck:
The full phrase I used (and I chose it carefully) was [emphasis mine] “I fail to understand why he isn’t running away with the nomination in terms of support from conservatives.”
That phrase wasn’t just thrown in there for fun. I have no problem seeing why he isn’t running away with the nomination. He’s too studied and measured (just wait, though, till you see the video of him I will be posting tomorrow). But I’m talking about those conservatives who’ve been yapping and yapping, on this blog and others, for years and years and years about principled conservatives who can articulate yada yada. “Likability” is something they’ve been scoffing at, along with “electability,” and in the past have shown huge contempt for those who succumb to it.
Well, here we are.
You many have already done this here, neo-neocon, but I find it fun to imagine a “dream” cabinet, etc. with the current slate of candidates. I’d put Rubio at the head of the ticket with Nickie Haley as his running mate to win the election. Rand Paul in charge of the Fed. Ted Cruz as Attorney General. Carly Fiorina in charge of Commerce. Jindal in charge of HUD and/or education. Carson as Surgeon General…
Rufus Firefly:
That’s one of the many reasons I’m considering Rubio; he’s less hated by the people he’d have to work with. Although I have to say I think Cruz could overcome the animus against him; he would have a different role as president than he had as opposition senator.
But I agree with you that Trump would be the worst of the lot, by far. No contest.
And yet we have all these supposedly principled conservatives getting off their high principled horses and down in the dirt with him. Go figure.
Nick:
I’m talking about his entire life. As AG of Texas, as a person, as a husband and father, as a chuchgoer, and also that his character shines forth as he talks (not his charisma or lack thereof; his character). Compared to practically all other politicians he has shown consistency between what he has promised and what he has actually done. He also has shown tremendous courage in the Senate.
There is a good assessment of Senator Cruz from a libertarian perspective which appeared in Reason earlier this year. It is titled Ted Cruz: Loose Cannon or Libertarian Reformer? His early education included study of classic libertarian economists like Milton Friedman, von Mises, and Rothbard. Fine and good. I’m also sure he is up on the Socratic Method and could out-debate almost anyone. It’s the “loose cannon” possibility that is a warning flag.
https://reason.com/archives/2015/01/17/ted-cruz-loose-cannon-or-liber
Recent polls have been wildly inaccurate. I would guess that some of this is agitating FOR Trump by Democrats and GOPe, believing that Trump can’t win.
If Trump blows everyone away in the first few primaries, THEN I’ll believe he’s on top (but I still won’t vote for him).
There are too many people on our side that can’t forgive a politician for being a politician.
I’ve decided that if Hill wins, I’m getting rid of my TV. No way I’m listening to that cackle for four/eight years.
I agree with Neo that Cruz is the best man to lead the war against Islamic imperialism. He is extremely smart and he gives every indication that he has a fully functional moral compass.
I don’t know where people get this unlikeability thing about Ted from seeing him on TV. I’ve seen him twice in person and he was plenty friendly and likeable. Barack is VERY likeable but the worst president ever.
As to the Senate not liking him, so what?
I also meet Rand Paul. Now HE is unlikable.
Cornhead:
People are intimidated by his brainpower. He makes them feel stupid.
Also, he does have a smooth and polished way about him that some find robotic. I don’t find it a problem, but I do wish he was a little more warm and fuzzy because I think it would enhance his appeal. Reagan had the warm fuzzy thing down.
Lastly, I think that some people just repeat what they hear. They hear he’s unlikable, so they say it.
Cruz is my top pick of the professional politicians. But he is connecting with the people.
Trump is. Watch the first part of this video of his rally in a Texas city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KUMb_7LH9Q&feature=iv&src_vid=Pv0iqg1PnSE&annotation_id=annotation_3736331201
The speech is still full of the usual Trump self-aggrandisement, but the huge crowd laps it up. Would that Cruz could draw the same crowds.
PatD:
You can wish all you want (I wish, too) but you can’t expect Cruz to draw those crowds. The crowds are partly because Trump is a mega-celebrity and showman with a built-in following from years of celebrity. That’s a whole nother ballgame.
He also is benefitting from TONS of media coverage, far more than any other candidate. The media wants to build him up because they think he’s a spoiler, which IMHO he is.
I meant Cruz is not connecting. Sorry.
I like Cruz’s idea of a law stripping citizenship from any citizen who goes to the ME and spends time in the ISIS area. It has always been treasonous to offer your services to an enemy of the country. (Definition: The betrayal of one’s own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies.) I don’t see why these people, and we certainly know about a number of them, are not immediately brought up on charges. The law would make it easy to do and not as difficult/controversial as formal charges of treason.
I like Cruz. I watched him buck the Gang of Eight in the Senate during the comprehensive immigration reform hearings. He did not back down even though several Repubs (McCain and Graham particularly) were highly incensed by his opposition. Principled and assertive he is. His biggest negativity is a likability problem. At least it seems that way to me. He often comes off as a humorless preacher convinced of his superiority to those who don’t agree with him. That said, I would vote for him if he wins the nomination.
I think Cruz’s main defect as a candidate is speaking naturally to an audience. It comes off, at least to me, as a bit artificial and studied. Romney had the same problem. OTOH, Cruz is excellent in debate, in responding to reporters, and in small groups. Rubio probably has more political talent, and Carson is someone who evangelicals can understand, even if it escapes northeastern hicks like Trump. Trump supporters have reached the point of irrationality.
I think Cruz can learn to do better with practice, something that Romney just wasn’t able to do.
J.J.:
Make sure, then, that you catch my post tomorrow with a video of Cruz.
You may be surprised. Very surprised.
I like Cruz as well (a lot), but I’ll also observe (again) that there’s something about him that reminds me of Pat Buchanan and note that Mr. Buchanan is VERY hard to like. That said, I hasten to add that I admire Cruz’s intelligence, debating skills, apparent integrity and courage. I’m simply dismayed by Trump and hope fervently that he doesn’t get the nomination because then I’d have to vote for a man I really, really don’t like (like most of you, I’d vote for any of them over hrc).
Neo-Neocon:
Celebrity certainly helps Trump. I don’t agree that he is a spoiler. I believe he is in it for real because he is doing more than campaign appearances. He has staked out positions in his book, “Crippled America”, put out position papers on five major issues, and built campaign organizations in the early states.
If you watch the video, you see how he can connect with and control a large crowd. Bringing the relatives of victims of illegal immigrants on stage and having them tell their stories sounds like a corny stunt but it was effective.
Maybe he has peaked too early, and polling doom is just around the corner. That is what the pundits have been telling us for months.
In terms of electability, Trump has attributes that other GOP candidates lack. He can appeal to LIVs and his stance on trade will appeal to the private sector union vote. Do you think the UAW membership doesn’t get the message when he blasts Ford for building a plant in Mexico? He will also appeal to the Tea Party folk, who gave the GOP the house in 2010, and the senate in 2014, and then felt betrayed because the GOP did nothing to stop Obama’s lawless ways.
The fact the GOP congress critters regularly insult Tea Party folk only helps Trump. and, maybe Cruz.
I can’t quite figure our Carson’s appeal. Maybe it is because he has a compelling life story, he is not part of the GOP establishment, and he is not a brash loudmouth like Trump.
Anyways, this election cycle is turning out to be way more interesting than the snooze fests that delivered McCain and Romney.
PatD
When I saw Trump in Sioux City I asked him why he liked Trump. Answer? “He’s just like me.”
Correction: “him” should be “I asked a blue-collar guy” ….
PatD wrote, “I can’t quite figure our Carson’s appeal.”
He appeals to me because:
1) He understands the rot that Obamacare is as a doctor and can speak to it from that perspective
2) He is not low information like Trump – nor does he resort to name calling as a first or second or third method of dealing with a tough question or opponent.
3) If he makes the incorrect determination on an issue – I believe he more than any other candidate will actually listen – see and react appropriately to DisneyFacebookGoogle H1B or Kate Steinle or whatever the issue is. He’s smart enough to know what are the keys to an issue. Which general or admiral is blowing smoke.
4) He can provide healing on the race issue – shutting down the wheels that Obama has set in motion in EVERY federal department that is creating policy based on a race lens and speaking to what it takes to succeed. Hard work and personal responsibility.
These positives can be ascribed to Ted Cruz and Carly Fiorina and Jindal (except item #1). Second tier for me is Rubio and Chris Cristie because I don’t see their listening skills as good as the first tier of candidates.
Democrats? Forget about it. They can’t listen to any set of reason. Their mind is made up that climate change is a bigger threat than ISIS.
As I wrote earlier, I am not sure I have any idea of what any of these people are really like, but I base my assessment of Cruz’ “unlikability” on the fact that so many Republicans who work with him are willing to make very public statements against him. Bob Dole recently made it clear that he hates Cruz, I believe both President Bush’s have stated the same (and they rarely state any opinions on any politicians). I believe I’ve read Rand Paul (another Republican willing to make a principled stance, like Cruz) also hates Cruz. The party leadership does not like him.
Being disliked by some of those folks is probably a testament to Cruz being a true Conservative, but, unfortunately, those people are not going away. As I wrote, Lincoln had some key folks on his own team working against him. I fear a President Cruz would face the same animosity.
I heard an interview of Dr. Carson on a handful of key questions (economy, defense, taxation…) and was astounded with his in-depth and very opinionated replies, including detailed, historical information of fact, people and countries involved. I don’t know if he’s always been interested in politics and current events, or, as a Doctor he’s just remarkably good at cramming for exams, but he is no lightweight on the issues facing the Presidency. He is also not hesitant to make very clear, specific statement on what he believes needs to be done.
It would be risky electing him since he literally has no political experience, but I think Sanders, Clinton or Trump present a greater risk.
As with Cruz, it’s difficult to believe a President Carson could get anyone in DC to work with him. Paul would probably have the same problem.
> He will also appeal to the Tea Party folk,
Not this one. To me he comes off as a boor with a big mouth, no class, and the outlook of a Liberal. He has hit on some popular positions, but given that he held opposite positions a few years ago I trust his sincerity not at all. Nor do I trust him to go after Hillary. Go after Republicans, sure, so did Romney, but Clinton is socially closer to Trump than the Republican candidates are.
I’ll add that I think Trump would lose the women’s vote badly, badly enough to lose the election. Which is what the polls show and I don’t see how he can overcome that without becoming a different person. I’d choose Cruz if it was my choice, but Rubio may be the most electable. And, who knows, maybe Carson appeals to more people than we know. I have many evangelicals in my extended family, a tradition running back more than a century, and I could see Carson easily fitting in with most of them.
As Fiorina seemingly fades, I see Cruz, Rubio, and Carson as the top of the remaining field. Glad to see comments that the donald is a spoiler: basically hrc’s Trojan Horse.
Rufus T. Firefly:
Bob Dole last held office in 1996. He is now 92 years old. Ted Cruz is 44 years old. He was in his early twenties when Dole left office, Cruz having just graduated from Harvard Law in 1995. In 1996 he was clerking for Rehnquist (by the way, Cruz was the first Hispanic to clerk for a SCOTUS justice). Then he worked as a lawyer for a while, then was a legal advisor to Bush, and then was Solicitor General in Texas. He entered national politics for the first time in 2012, as a senator.
In other words, Bob Dole has no personal experience of Ted Cruz except rumors he’s heard from others. Dole is famously bad-tempered and grudge-holding, as well.
As for the Bushes, they are angry that he’s running against Jeb, and consider it a betrayal. Again, neither Bush ever worked with him except back in GW’s campaign, when they were allies and Cruz was an advisor. There was no reported enmity back then.
Rand Paul strikes me as a nasty, petulant guy himself. And of course the party leadership doesn’t like Cruz. He’s challenged them and is his own man.
I think anyone will have trouble working with the Republicans in Congress. In the role of president, I’m not at all sure that Cruz would have any more trouble with them than anyone else.
And Lincoln managed to do okay.
Cornhead:
Well, Trump is just like Trump, too.
Most days 🙂 .
PatD:
I went to Tea Party meetings when it was first becoming a movement, and Trump sure doesn’t appeal to me in the least.
You know who else he does NOT appeal to? Independents. He does worse than any other Republican with them. That is why he does worse than most of the other Republicans against Hillary, according to polls. And this has been consistently true.
Baklava, I agree with all of your points about Carson. In addition and in short, he is the un-politician. He often makes reference to the Founding Fathers. If you stand back and examine his credentials, he is very much in line with them. They were men of science but at the same time religious. We haven’t seen their likes in 200 years. It’s as if Dr. Ben Carson is part of The Enlightenment time warped into the present.
To any Trump supporters — chew on the following tweet of his today for a while, and tell me why he’d hold up an Obama remark as a reason why we should be for Trump, and also just how all that success of the Russian air strikes stopped Paris from happening:
President Obama just told President Putin how important the Russian air strikes against ISIS have been. I TOLD YOU SO!
Sheesh.
@F
“Cruz cites a frightening statistic: that 77% of the Muslim refugees arriving in Europe are men of military age. He calls that a strange demographic.
It is not entirely strange: had someone been checking the age and sex of migrants fleeing from the US to Canada at the height of the Vietnam draft, it would likely have been similar.”
Um, F, there’s a difference between war refugees and draft dodgers (you forgot to mention the deserters). Anyone with refugee experience will tell you that usually the young men in war zones are killed, neutralized, etc. and it’s the women and children in the vast majority fleeing.
Your argument is a leftist FAIL.
@Neo-neocon: He is catching up on Hillary and he hasn’t spent any significant money.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
@Baklava: Don’t misunderstand me. I have a lot of respect for the good doctor. But I don’t see executive experience. Trump is not low-information. Read his book and/or his position papers. My biggest beef with Carson is his position on illegal immigration.
With enough money, despite the air cover of the msm; Cruz, Rubio, Carson, Fiorina, and Christie can run circles around hrc as long as they stay on message and are willing to take the heat and dish it back two fold. The question is who has the most determination to do what it takes to win and who is truly willing to prove to voters they will begin to put DC back into the box of the Constitution and defend the values of our founding? That person will win the nomination.
PatD wrote, “But I don’t see executive experience.”
Watch his movie played by Cuba Gooding Jr. or read his book Gifted Hands. He led. He is a leader. He showed what it takes to be an executive when he directed a team of 50 surgeons to do what no other has done.
He has started a scholarship foundation that has provided more scholarships than anybody I know.
What does it take to be a good executive? I believe I know. I am one.
It takes good judgement and temperment (of which Trump does not have), and the ability to articulate solutions (of which Trump doesn’t do – maybe in papers written by his staff), and the ability most of all – to listen.
Listening is the most important skill in life. Trust me.
The majority of the American people have shown in the last two elections that character does not matter an iota to them — they voted for Barry twice, against men of great character. Likability is above all. Cruz is brilliant, principled, a skilled orator, but as many here have said, he is not likable — he doesn’t connect with people.
We must keep in mind William Buckley’s admonition — nominate “the most conservative ELECTABLE candidate.”
I’m not saying Fiorina or Carson will win over vast hordes of women or blacks, but they will keep them away from the polls, which is just as good.
@Baklava: Executive experience in business and government is different from executive experience in medicine. We have a dear friend, a retired nurse, who wants to believe that Carson’s experience as a surgeon, knowing what to cut, or not cut, qualifies him. She is married to a surgeon, driven out of business by Obamacare, but that is a whole different story.
The first thing a chief executive needs to do is set a direction. The second thing is to pick great people and delegate responsibility to them. The third thing is to fire those who fail.
Trump has set a direction “Make America Great Again”. Simple, concise, and right on the money.
Can you doubt that a man who built a multi-billion dollar fortune, after a good start, admittedly, doesn’t know how to delegate responsibility? So, we can be sure he will pick great people. And the failures will be fired.
I admire Ben Carson but I don’t see executive experience on the scale the job requires. Of course, our current President falls so far short of the mark that a bullfrog sitting in a pond, let alone Ben Carson or Ted Cruz, would be a vast improvement.
PatD, how does viciously attacking a decent man like Dr. Carson show executive ability? If Trump wants to bring along people who support other candidates for the general election, he won’t do it by mocking them. If he thinks that we don’t have anyplace else to go, he should remember the 2012 election and all those people who didn’t vote.
I don’t get the Carson thing. Reminds me of the Colin Powell enthusiasm, though Carson is at least a real conservative, and not a screen onto which hopeful people project their yearnings.
And Cruz is not “likeable”? Is this what resonates with the people we call our “fellow” citizens?
Even conservatives seem to crave a Daddy Love Me in some respects. Our Father who art in Washington.
What a pathetic race …
My point remains as it was some months ago, that to the present Cruz has demonstrated the cool headed ability to deal with situations, the intellect to match anyone’s, debating and real-time analytical skills superior to anyone’s, the principles to guide him, the moral resolution to defend liberty.
Yet even those I know, think that he may not be “warm” enough. Frankly, he seems plenty human, and in some ways too generous with the opposition, to me.
I wonder if people really do want to be free; and, am increasingly convinced that what the run-of-the-mill American nowadays craves, is belonging and inclusion and the esteem of others, above all else.
“And Cruz is not “likeable”? Is this what resonates with the people we call our “fellow” citizens?”
Yes. Feel free to dislike it all you want, but that’s still what it will take to convince the media that they have more to lose by opposing him than by ignoring him. Remember, the media has proven, in both Vietnam and OIF, that they can turn even the fastest, most stunning military victories into “quagmires” with “no end in sight,” and force us to withdraw just as the path to victory was cleared. They will never support what will have to be done to stop ISIS once and for all (which is why the Democrats can not and will not succeed in achieving anything other than a stalemate), but they can at least be convinced not to intervene on behalf of the terrorists (aka “unarmed civilians” as soon as the weapons are removed and their bodies properly posed in the rubble for maximum pathos) by a “likable” enough candidate.
PatD wrote “Can you doubt that a man who built a multi-billion dollar fortune, after a good start, admittedly, doesn’t know how to delegate responsibility?”
You didn’t get my point. It’s not about knowing how or where to cut. That isn’t the point I made. It’s about knowing how to lead (and listen). Dismissing is not listening.
To address your quote. Yes. George Soros built a multi-billion dollar fortune. He’s HEAVILY invested in resettling refugees across Europe and america.
I address your point. Please address mine. Thanks.
https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/2015/11/03/george-soros-eu-must-take-in-one-million-migrants-a-year/
The Other Chuck wrote, “If Trump wants to bring along people who support other candidates for the general election, he won’t do it by mocking them.”
That’s his go to stick. The worst kind of leader. Just like Obama in temperament.
Pithy as it is, I’d note that Obama was very “electable”. It’s not really a useful metric.
Exactly Tesh.
Electable as he was a blank slate. Just like Ross Perot and Trump.
On the street interviews asked voters what would Obama do specifically and in case after case – nobody really knew!!!
He talked about transforming america and hope.
Maybe Trump and Carson should do that. Executive experience didn’t matter for Obama. Sarah Palin and Carson had infinity times more executive experience because anything divided by zero is infinity mathematically.
Yay, Trump’s got a slogan! I’m so impressed!
And he’s delegated authority in companies he owns and operates. Why, that means he’ll choose wonderful people in government and be a great president! It’s all clear to me now!
And your reference to his position papers is meaningless. Do you think he wrote them? I think not, and one of the reasons I don’t think so is that he usually dodges questions that ask him to speak about them in any detail. And when he does choose to answer such questions, he sometimes contradicts things that are in the position papers. In other words, he doesn’t seem especially familiar with their content.
I don’t follow your logic. In fact, it doesn’t seem very logical. Trump,among other things, is not used to having any checks and balances to his power. He has no experience working with Congress. He’s good at slogans, though, and bluster, and promoting himself, and cheating on his wives, and making money.
Whatever could go wrong?
I noticed the contradictions also Neo. Though I can’t pinpoint which specific at this moment in time. I’m pretty sure it was regarding his immigration paper. There was a follow up question to him after the paper was issued and I remember thinking – oh my that’s already changed! 🙂
Baklava:
Those who have been bewitched by the spell of the great wizard Trump really don’t care, though.
Executive actions 🙂
http://pjmedia.com/blog/states-slam-doors-on-syrian-refugees/?singlepage=true
Guess who will win the election this next presidential election?
A republican.
http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Connecticut-to-Accept-More-Than-1600-Refugees-from-Syria-Governor–350647401.html?abc=2233&_osource=SocialFlowFB_CTBrand
Two Democrat governors (PA an CT) have said they will continue to accept “refugees” (soldier aged middle east men)
My wife saw the 19 minute video going around. She was more moved by that video than any other video she’s seen this year. She’s Mexican. She gets it and more.
Cuts across all thinking
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/11/16/im-a-gay-man-and-mass-muslim-immigration-terrifies-me/
@Baklava: All politicians trade insults, including Carson. He is just nicer about it.
Executive experience involves leadership. If Trump had no leadership skills, he couldn’t have built an empire of around 70 major properties across the US and around the world. He needed to work with construction companies, unions, government agencies at all levels, politicians and his own people to make that happen. Admittedly, four of his properties in Atlantic city went bankrupt. So did almost everybody else in Atlantic City. He used bankruptcy laws to protect the rest of his properties, as does anyone in business. The question with Trump is whether his leadership and negotiating skills transfer to the presidency. That will be answered when he starts talking about who he is going to appoint. So far, he has only talked about Carl Icahn, another business magnate.
Ben Carson’s executive experience seems to have been limited to his leadership role in neurosurgery. Wonderful as that was, I don’t see it as demonstrating the necessary executive ability the country needs in its President. His web-site is rather short on specifics. Unlike Trump’s, it says nothing about illegal immigration. Going to the ever-reliable Wikipedia (I checked the quotes), I read:
The idea of using drones to bomb caves in order to halt illegal immigration sounds a little strange. The illegals don’t have to hide on the Mexican side of the border and bombing caves in Mexico could be construed as an act of war.
Anything that gives illegals legal status without forcing them to re-enter the country legally is amnesty, pure and simple. And what’s to stop the next Democrat President from creating a pathway to citizenship for those illegals granted legal status? The temptation for a party as crooked as the Democrat party to add 11 million new Democrat voters would be irresistible. GOP candidates like Bush and Kasich are going nowhere precisely because they support some form of amnesty.
Once Carson’s views on giving legal status to Illegals are widely advertised, his numbers will tank. This election will be about illegal immigration. Obama’s decision to import 100,000 Syrian “refugees” and the recent Paris atrocity will keep illegal immigration at the top. Trump put it there and that is the sole reason why this rude buffoon is leading in the polls. Since he is not bought, he is the only candidate that people trust on illegal immigration. Everyone else is owned by their large donors, and they will support policies advocated by those donors, including open borders, TPP, and a regulatory framework favorable to Wall Street. One only has to look at the way the GOP has betrayed its conservative supporters to realize that most GOP candidates are only conservative when they are running. If the GOP had kept its promises to secure the border, Trump would be no place.
From the beginning I’ve had my money on Cruz. He is the toughest on Islamic terror and is spot on with many other issues. We need someone this tough on ISIS, this is an emergency. We have to put this at the very top of our priorities.
As for him being electable, I don’t see why not if Hillary is electable. Trump is absolutely NOT electable as he seems to me to be a crazy clown. Even if he sometimes says “the right things” are Islamic terrorism, I don’t trust him. I don’t think most people do and if it came down to the wire against Hillary, I think she’d sweep in. She would seem like the safer choice.
@Liberty Wolf: Have you seen the response Trump is getting? Nobody else is getting that response on the campaign trail. Nobody. Most definitely not Hillary. In a match-up, Trump will do to her what Holly Holm did to that Bernie Sanders supporter.
PatD:
You persist in this idea that Trump does well against Hillary. And yet you’ve offered not an ounce of backup evidence for that idea. Crowds are never an indication of what will happen in an election. Polls are not perfect, but they’re far better prognosticators than crowds. And yet the polls show Trump doing consistently worse than any of the other major candidates against Hillary. I’ve presented them to you, with links, time and again. I’m not going to repeat my wasted efforts here, because you’re never responded to that evidence. Suffice to say they show that he loses badly—worse than any other major Republican candidate—with Independents. He does the same as other candidates with Democrats—that is to say, they don’t support him. It’s the Independents who can’t stand him. They like Rubio and Carson, especially Carson, very much, and that’s why Carson does best against Hillary.
You can ignore the polls or you can discount them. But it’s telling the you merely assert your opinion over and over with nothing whatsoever to back it up except Trump’s popularity with his supporters, who of course are wildly enthusiastic. Let me remind you that Romney drew tremendous and enthusiastic crowds, much more so than Obama did, right up to the time Romney lost to him.