Ted Cruz endorses Donald Trump
Yes, it happened. Here’ a short excerpt from Cruz’s statement:
This election is unlike any other in our nation’s history. Like many other voters, I have struggled to determine the right course of action in this general election.
In Cleveland, I urged voters, “please, don’t stay home in November. Stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket whom you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.”
After many months of careful consideration, of prayer and searching my own conscience, I have decided that on Election Day, I will vote for the Republican nominee, Donald Trump.
I’ve made this decision for two reasons. First, last year, I promised to support the Republican nominee. And I intend to keep my word.
Second, even though I have had areas of significant disagreement with our nominee, by any measure Hillary Clinton is wholly unacceptable ”” that’s why I have always been #NeverHillary…
Our country is in crisis. Hillary Clinton is manifestly unfit to be president, and her policies would harm millions of Americans. And Donald Trump is the only thing standing in her way.
Why would anyone be surprised or disappointed at this? That’s a rhetorical question, of course; I’m well aware of the reasons. But I don’t share them. I’ve figured, particularly in the last month or two, that this would probably be Cruz’s only possible course of action. I also happen to think that, although politicians always have tactical/strategic aspects for their decisions, and that the same is probably true for Cruz as well, I also happen to think he is one of the most reluctant of reluctant Trump supporters but that he means what he says and that neverHillary finally won him over.
That’s pretty much it. It’s pretty much the way I lean, too, despite my abhorrence and distrust of Donald Trump.
[ADDENDUM: By the way, when Cruz said “vote your conscience” back at the Republican Convention, he meant just that. Take a look at what I wrote about it back then. Also see this.]
Glad to hear it. Me too.
I was wondering if this was going to happen eventually.
Of course, expect a reporter to bring up the comment about Cruz’s father soon in a Trump press conference.
I’ve figured, particularly in the last month or two, that this would probably be Cruz’s only possible course of action.
Seems to me its the worst of all possible worlds for Cruz. Trump people will hate him for holding out so long. His own base will hate him for giving in. That is what happens when you try to please both sides (especially good and evil).
Also, I suspect this will harden opposition to Trump and definitely not help him.
Cruz endorsing djt makes no difference at the November ballot box. The only surprise is the timing. I thought Cruz would wait until October.
BTW, I still wish for a Cruz/Fiorina ticket in 2020.
This sounds like the reason for the endorsement to me:
When I first heard this today, I had very mixed feelings:
– If this had been any other election, I would have been very disappointed in Cruz, but in this one, he really did not have much choice, just like most conservatives, including me, who are also #NeverHillary, but loathe the inevitable choice to vote for the slimeball that is our only chance to defeat her
– Note he still didn’t say “I endorse Trump” which would include all his despicable awfulness. This is little different than his non-endorsing semi-endorsement at the convention, where he said Hillary is a disaster so “vote your conscience” which implied Trump, although the blowhard’s cult will never give Cruz credit for that.
– Even if Trump wins, the media and the Marxist leviathan will set out to destroy him in the polls, and if that happens, I hope Cruz primaries him
parker Says:
BTW, I still wish for a Cruz/Fiorina ticket in 2020.
Noted and recorded, but people in the desert wish for ice water.
I think most of the Alt Right would see this as vindication that their special PsyWar ops of personalizing and using Alinsky freeze tactics on people work.
Part of is because Cruz is a bogeyman to them, not a human. Another part is the Bandwagon effect of “if we all pile up on someone, not even Cruz or the Left can resist us”.
It’s not Godly, and it is merely part of America’s continual damnation and fall into Hell.
It’s interesting to see though, that’s for certain.
Allahpundit at HotAir is not pulling any punches:
I agree with ann (5:55 pm) [who barely beat me to the punch].
Ted Cruz is a bright guy, and it need not have taken “many months of careful consideration, of prayer and searching my own conscience.” It should have been a no-brainer. EXCEPT:
Granted, Cruz was in an emotionally uneasy position, given how Trump attacked very personally both himself and then his (Cruz’s) father. Granted. But all things considered, including how bright Cruz is reputed to be, it should have taken many hours, not many months.
Okay, many days, given the personal nature, the ugliness, and in the case of Cruz’s father, the over-the-top-edness [new word!] of the attacks. But not many months.
Not lookin’ real good, Ted. Not lookin’ real good.
V,
Yes, people in the desert wish. You wish to _____ ____ ____.
Fill in the blanks of your secret desire.
M J R:
Well, perhaps you think it should take days.
I think it should take months.
Actually, it should take years or perhaps centuries to decide to vote for an abomination like Trump, who has violated Cruz’s family and the truth as well.
Unfortunately, we don’t have centuries to decide.
Cruz is just a politician and as we now see, not a very good one. Worst of both worlds. He should have realized the GOP would put the screws to him and endorsed at the convention.
Ann:
Dishonor? Hardly. What a facile kneejerk reaction from Allahpundit.
“Vote your conscience” means just that. Take a look at what I wrote about it back then. Also see this.
For everyone who’s down on Cruz, I suggest you take a look at the links in the ADDENDUM I just added.
Humans are pathetic. I expect no better from them. Cruz has the same problem as everyone else here, in that vein. They are no better nor worse than him, in the end.
I’m hoping that two years into the Trump administration, you’ll admit that he wasn’t so bad after all. I’d hate to think you’d waste your talents spending the next four years saying “I told you so!”
“although politicians always have tactical/strategic aspects for their decisions, and that the same is probably true for Cruz as well, I also happen to think he is one of the most reluctant of reluctant Trump supporters but that he means what he says and that neverHillary finally won him over.” neo
I fully agree.
“BTW, I still wish for a Cruz/Fiorina ticket in 2020.”
That would be my wish as well. For that to eventuate, Trump would have to lose in 2016 and, at the least, Hillary’s attempts in creating a path to citizenship for illegals would have had to have failed. The first may be likely, IMO the second is… very unlikely.
“Cruz is just a politician and as we now see, not a very good one.” KLSmith
Perhaps but arguably, that speaks well of his character.
Ann and MJR said “Cruz chose dishonor”. For defending his wife and father? I’m sorry but I don’t see the dishonor there.
snopercod:
Believe me—as I’ve said many many times—if Trump is elected, I’d love to be able to see he was nowhere near as bad as I thought. I’d even love to be able to say he was good.
I’d much rather that than be able to say “I told you so” in this case.
Ymarsakar:
The distant and removed way you keep referring to “humans” makes me suspect you may be a space alien 🙂 .
Cruz’s endorsement is irrelevant. It was irrelevant at the convention as was its lack, and it is even more irrelevant now.
As for those who supported Cruz (I was one of them), and are still sore about the attacks leveled on him by Trump, I will remind you- politics isn’t beanbag, and there is nothing really beyond the pale when it comes to winning short of simply rigging the vote- that is just simple reality. The only real defining difference with Trump is that he doesn’t farm out the mudslinging to surrogates, and that probably costs him rather than helps him.
Neo:
I read those linked pieces of yours in the addendum when you first posted them. The big sticking point for me was your constant refrain about Cruz’s “integrity”, which ever since the dance he did over the history of his immigration stance I’ve not associated with him.
The statement is worth reading in its entirety. I wish Cruz hadn’t made the endorsement, and I won’t be voting for Trump, but I won’t count this endorsement against Cruz.
Ann:
I think it is evident that Cruz has about 10 times the integrity of most politicians (and 100, or 1000 times the integrity of Donald Trump). He is, after all, a politician, and I am sure he is not 100% forthcoming and pure about everything. That is absolutely not the same thing as not having integrity. He’s got plenty of it, and he has an extraordinary amount of it for a politician.
By the way, that Slate article you link is hardly the definitive word on the subject of Ted and whether his amendment was meant to be a poison pill. The truth about it is somewhat elusive; I’ve read articles pro and con and it’s not at all clear which is correct. For example, what do you think about what Jeff Sessions said?:
” neo-neocon Says:
September 23rd, 2016 at 7:03 pm
snopercod:
Believe me–as I’ve said many many times–if Trump is elected, I’d love to be able to see he was nowhere near as bad as I thought. I’d even love to be able to say he was good.
I’d much rather that than be able to say “I told you so” in this case.”
You and me both, sister. Too much is riding on this.
It’s like in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.
We’re going to have to hold hands and jump off the cliff.
I admit Cruz’s statement moved the needle a little bit for me in Trump’s favor. Over the past few weeks, I’ve been moving marginally in Trump’s direction. I habitually give at least serious consideration to anything Cruz has to say, if not necessarily agreeing. Now, having read the entry in question, I’m ready to consider pulling the lever for Trump. It’s not something I would have done a month or two ago.
I think Cruz indeed didn’t have much choice, ultimately, but that may not be a bad thing. In the end, there are some things one simply has to do in life, and part of honor is bearing those things with good grace.
I’ve lately been reading Conquest’s The Great Terror: A Reassessment, and it occurs to me that one’s hand can often be forced in politics. I found it suddenly surprisingly easy to picture a Stalinist-type show trial taking place under the H. R. Clinton aegis.
Senator Jeff Sessions is “a straight up guy”, if he says that Ted Cruz fought the good fight against immigration ‘reform’, then that’s good enough for me.
The distant and removed way you keep referring to “humans” makes me suspect you may be a space alien
Mad scientist studying humanity, might be closer.
Also half of it is running out of my Japanese language core, so it comes out weird in English.
Cruz didn’t even endorse Trum, he just said since people were going to vote their conscience anyway, that Cruz had to struggle with his on this matter.
Since he’s not my liege lord or commander, what he says doesn’t really matter. But to his supporters, it might, which is why Trum was begging/threatening Cruz for his support before the RNC.
Judging by how Trum and his clan council is shelling out money for Grassroots and other mailing lists from Breitbart, basically buying them up to send user surveys, they’re using a kind of Kickstarter grassroots feedback system. They are far behind the Google/Yahoo/Facebook teams behind the Leftist alliance, of course, but not that far behind.
It feels like a desperation ploy. Surveys and other brainstorming sessions isn’t what they should be doing now, of all times.
neo-neocon, 6:33 pm — “M J R: Well, perhaps *you* think it should take days. . . .”
I guess it’s a measure of how firmly anti-Hillary I am. As far as President Hillary is concerned, no, no, and (again I say unto thee) *no*. Supreme Court, invasion by immigrants who detest our system (and us), and so on. The “LL”s — Lois Lerner, Loretta Lynch, and so on. There’s a boatload more of that doo-doo coming our way. It’s vicious war on our worldview.
I’ve already recorded in these hallowed pages my misgivings about Trump (many and heartfelt). In his case, for me it’s no, no, and dammit, what other option is there? He probably won’t be worse — although I must grant that he could be worse — and he could conceivably be better. There’s the M J R endorsement: frame it [smile]!
(As I’ve also recorded here, my vote doesn’t matter in true-blue California, so maybe it may be just a teeny bit less stressful for me to have to decide between a rock and a hard place; I’ll watch it play out, whatever “it” turns out to be.)
I understand and sympathize with your position, neo. But I think that for me, the hard decision — which I’m really spared from making — is not quite as hard for me as it is for you.
— — — — —
snopercod, 7:02 pm — “Ann and MJR said ‘Cruz chose dishonor’.”
With all respect, M J R didn’t say that.
Yes, Ann did quote Allahpundit to that effect.
M J R mentioned that Ann beat him to the punch, but for M J R (me), “the punch” was supposed to be communicating the timing: the summer convention in my judgment, rather than the fall solstice. It was not my intent to be saying “Cruz chose dishonor”, but I do see how you would interpret our tandem posts that way.
Cruz made the mistake of overestimating the American public. Trump is a clown and now everyone’s part of the show.
P.S. I made the same mistake.
@ M J R:
He probably won’t be worse – although I must grant that he could be worse
Trump doesn’t have to be worse, just bad enough. If he’s elected, we’ll never know for sure what Hillary would’ve done. The counterfactuals will be impossible to disprove, exactly as planned.
They will also work for the same reasons all the rhetoric aiding Trump has worked.
Ymarsakar:
Well, I know you’re actually one of us humans.
Although on the internet nobody knows you’re a dog.
Here are the stakes in this election- and I state them for the very last time:
If Clinton wins, she appoints the next SCOTUS judge, and moves to implement Obama immigration executive orders. By 2020 there will a net 5 million plus extra new voters pulling the levers for her reelection, or Kaine’s reelection. There won’t be a revival with a non-Trump candidate in 2020 that has a prayer of winning in that case. In addition, the court rulings that have hamstrung the Democrats in the House (at past Democrats’ behest, but that doesn’t matter) will be relaxed to their benefit, while the gerrymanders that Republicans did to benefit themselves get toss out at the appellate and High Court levels. By 2022, the Republican’s edge in the House will also be gone.
The Democrats have clear goal in mind, I don’t know what goal some Republicans have at this moment- suicide is what it looks like to me.
Ted Cruz in May:
I’m going to do something I haven’t done for the entire campaign, for those of y’all who have traveled with me all across the country. I’m going to tell you what I really think of Donald Trump. This man is a pathological liar. He doesn’t know the difference between truth and lies. He lies practically every word that comes out of his mouth. And, in a pattern that I think is straight out of a psychology textbook, his response is to accuse everybody else of lying.
He accuses everybody on that debate stage of lying, and it’s simply a mindless yell. Whatever he does, he accuses everyone else of doing.
The man cannot tell the truth, but he combines it with being a narcissist. A narcissist at a level – I don’t think this country’s ever seen. Donald Trump is such a narcissist that Barack Obama looks at him and goes, “Dude, what’s your problem?” Everything in Donald’s world is about Donald.
And he combines being a pathological liar… and I say pathological because I actually think Donald, if you hooked him up to a lie detector test, he could say one thing in the morning, one thing at noon, and one thing in the evening, all contradictory, and he’d pass the lie detector test each time. Whatever lie he’s telling at that minute, he believes it.
But the man is utterly amoral. [Reporter starts a question] Let, let me finish this, please. The man is utterly amoral. Morality does not exist for him. It’s why he went after Heidi directly and smeared my wife. Attacked her. Apparently she’s not pretty enough for Donald Trump. I may be biased but I think if he’s making that allegation, he’s also legally blind.
But Donald is a bully. You know, we just visited with fifth graders. Every one of us knew bullies in elementary school. Bullies don’t come from strength, bullies come from weakness. Bullies come from a deep, yawning cavern of insecurity. There is a reason Donald builds giant buildings and puts his name on them everywhere he goes.
And I will say, there are millions of people in this country who are angry. They’re angry at Washington, they’re angry at politicians who have lied to them, I understand that anger. I share that anger. And Donald is cynically exploiting that anger, and he is lying to his supporters.
Donald will betray his supporters on every issue. If you care about immigration, Donald is laughing at you. And he’s telling the moneyed elites that he doesn’t believe what he’s saying, he’s not gonna build a wall – that’s what he told the New York Times, he will betray you on every issue across the board.
The Other Chuck:
Your point?
I’ve said pretty much what Cruz said, over and over. And yet I’ve also said I might have to vote for him in the end. Unfortunately, the situation being what it is, that’s the conundrum that faces us, and it faces Ted Cruz, too.
The choice you face is a difficult personal one which you are in no way obligated to share. Were I living in a swing state I might feel it necessary to hold my nose, suppress my better judgement and vote for the bastard. But I wouldn’t advertise it out of shame.
Ted Cruz just showed us he’s a loathsome hypocrite. It’s good that his wife went back to work at Goldman Sachs because his political career is over.
The Other Chuck:
Ted Cruz is no more a “loathsome hypocrite” than I am. Everything he said is true about Trump, and Trump may still be the lesser of two evils. Nothing hypocritical or loathsome about coming to that conclusion after much thought. No one knows whether it’s correct or not, but plenty of people have reached the same terrible conclusion when faced with the same terrible conundrum.
Matt_SE, 11:05 pm — “Trump doesn’t have to be worse, just bad enough. If he’s elected, we’ll never know for sure what Hillary would’ve done.”
Of course, the same applies to virtually any situation that is historical and therefore cannot be duplicated. What if Truman had not dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What if M J R had eaten squash last night instead of cauliflower (and not gotten poisoned by the cauliflower)? No, we’ll never know.
Of course, we’ll never know whether Trump turns out to be worse than Hillary, if he is elected.
“The counterfactuals will be impossible to disprove, exactly as planned.”
I get the first part of that sentence, but not the second. Precisely what was “exactly as planned”? The fact that one election cannot be duplicated? Is that “planned”, or is that a fact of the material universe? Help me on this, will ya?
If you’re confused see the shifting narrative of the GWB presidency, especially in hindsight.
Although Jonah Goldberg of NRO is characterized as NeverTrump and has often excoriated Trump, Goldberg concedes if he knew he was casting the deciding vote, he would cast that vote for Trump.
But since Goldberg lives in a blue state, the odds are astronomical his vote in the presidential race will matter much. Furthermore, Goldberg is under no illusion NeverTump has the numbers to be significant.
NeverTrump is only significant in the sense that what drives a slim minority of Republicans and conservatives to be NeverTrump is what drives much larger numbers of moderates and swing voters to vote against Trump.
Those are the voters who will defeat Trump. And that is on Trump himself and his early supporters, not NeverTrump.
I can’t get excited either way about the Cruz annoucement. It was obviously a political calculation, perhaps a necessary one for his career. But given how wacko this election year is, in which both choices are terrible though for different reasons, I can’t hold anything against anyone.
I don’t see a big future for Cruz in any event. He may go on as a Texas senator, but I think 2016 was his shot for president and he fell far short. He’s not as bad as Hillary, but he’s doesn’t have the It that gets voters excited.
Just like the rest of us, Cruz is trying to make the best out of a bad situation. I agree with neo-that does not make him a hypocrite or evil or a sellout. I will support him and I think we will see good things from him in pushing a conservative agenda. The odds are against conservatives in politics today and it is crazy to throw one of the few in Washington under the bus for dealing with reality.
only possible course of action. I also happen to think that,
Then this also be only possible course of action. For other voters, is’nt
I think we owe something to those who didn’t jump on the Trump bandwagon early. That may have helped tone him down a bit and given more clout to the most reasonable and knowledgeable of his supporters. Who knows what Trump might have said without the opposition of Trump resisters. Had all conservatives gone full Breitbart on Trump, we may have had a bigger disaster.
neo-neocon wrote:
I expect the Alinsky students who comment here to accuse neo-neocon of sending out a secret Alt-Right signal.
In any event, Cruz got it right. And,
CLINTON DELLENDA EST!
Cruz has an unique distinction among USA politicians: when he speaks about his religious or moral convictions, which he rarely does, it rings true.
Ymarsakar – Cruz did explicitly endorse Trump:
“After many months of careful consideration, of prayer and searching my own conscience, I have decided that on Election Day, I will vote for the Republican nominee, Donald Trump….
“Our country is in crisis. Hillary Clinton is manifestly unfit to be president, and her policies would harm millions of Americans. And Donald Trump is the only thing standing in her way.
“A year ago, I pledged to endorse the Republican nominee, and I am honoring that commitment. And if you don’t want to see a Hillary Clinton presidency, I encourage you to vote for him.”
Like I said, the statement is worth reading in its entirety.
Sergey, I didn’t realize you are a master of the droll and facetious.
Well Neo, the circle has been squared. So be it.
NeverHillary will take you to some strange places. So far, I’ve been willing to go.
The other Chuck: For some people sincere expression of one’s religiosity always looks like hypocrisy: they can not come to terms with the fact that such thing is ever possible. Sorry, but this speaks more about yourself than about Cruz.
This endorsement came the next day after Trump issued the list of Supreme Court judges he would nominate if got elected. It included Cruz’s best friend in the Senate, Republican Mike Lee of Utah. For Cruz this was a decisive argument to support Cruz. And yes, this is actually the crucial issue of the whole campaign.
I also believe all bad things Cruz told about Trump in May. But, but, who ever took at face value what a professional real estate salesman says? To say lies to please and attract customers is the most important ability in this trade. There is a saying “If you can fake sincerity, you can fake everything”. True, and Trump can fake sincerity better than anybody I know. But something also tells me that eventually he is not actually a such loose cannon as he preferred to look at nomination campaign. He is disciplined enough to look reasonable and even presidential when he wants to, and this means that he really knows what is reasonable and what is not.
CLINTON DELLENDA EST!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUXHB5U-Vl4
I still like Ted Cruz, despite his flip-flop on Donald Trump.
The existence of Ted Cruz is evidence that the Ann Coulter – Laura Ingraham view of politics is incorrect. Ted Cruz is the son of a Cuban immigrant, a Hispanic, one of the people part of the demographic trend that, if you believe Coulter and Ingraham, will doom conservatism.
Yet Cruz is among the most conservative members of the United States Senate. Donald Trump is a white guy. He represents the demographic that is, according to Coulter and Ingraham, the core of conservatism. Donald Trump donated money to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2007-2008, Harry Reid’s US Senate campaign in 2010 and Terry McAuliffe’s campaign for Governor of Virginia in 2013.
Also, lily white Vermont (94 percent white) elects democratic socialist (or perhaps Stalinist) Bernie Sanders (Sanders spent his honeymoon in the Soviet Union). Multi-ethnic Texas elects Ted Cruz and other conservatives. Texas has no state income tax.
A lily white country is not necessarily a conservative country. In the 1960s to 1980s, lily white countries like Sweden and Denmark enacted democratic socialism. Even America’s New Deal and Great Society moves toward democratic socialism were conducted when the non-white vote was not influential.
So, contrary to Coulter and Ingraham and other Trump supporters, demography is not destiny.
Is Ted Cruz eligible to nomination of Supreme Court judge? His resume includes following: He was the first Hispanic, and the longest-serving, Solicitor General in Texas history. From 2004 to 2009, Cruz was an Adjunct Professor at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin, Texas, where he taught U.S. Supreme Court litigation. If so, Trump should return favor and include him in his list of possible nominees. I believe that Cruz can be an excellent Supreme Court judge, he is too honest to be a successful politician and makes too many foes.
Lest we forget, Cruz is a politician and has motivations that are different than for a regular citizen.
We could cynically attribute it to helping his friend to SCOTUS, like Sergey says, or even to a last ditch attempt to remain relevant, given that trump has closed the gap, on the eve of the debates, and looks to be within reach of the brass ring.
A trump win would relegate Cruz’s relevance to practically nil, and a post debate surge in trump’s favor would make it rather close to nil, but a well timed “endorsement” before any major / decisive move has some political value.
Or, we could attribute it to Cruz having deeply weighed the pros and cons and honestly determined trump is better for the country.
It doesn’t escape me that the six points Cruz makes in his reasons for supporting trump have a key phrase in them of a variation of “trump has promised”.
Hard to square with his past statement of…
“This man is a pathological liar. He doesn’t know the difference between truth and lies. He lies practically every word that comes out of his mouth.”
9 times of 10 we ought to look at incentives. This is the problem of such a big government, it creates the wrong incentives. I don’t think Cruz is immune to it, but maybe this is the 1 in 10 case. IDK.
No matter which way one looks at it, it has to be a major meal of crow for Cruz to come out and admit to voting for trump. That alone weakens him for those looking at him on both sides of the question.
Sergey, I don’t question Ted Cruz’ sincere religious beliefs nor do I believe he is a religious hypocrite. What I found amusing in your post is the assertion that he rarely expresses them publicly. Give me a break! Were you paying attention to his campaign?
expat: I think we owe something to those who didn’t jump on the Trump bandwagon early. That may have helped tone him down a bit and given more clout to the most reasonable and knowledgeable of his supporters. Who knows what Trump might have said without the opposition of Trump resisters. Had all conservatives gone full Breitbart on Trump, we may have had a bigger disaster.
Your use of past tense is funny 🙂 – we’re still in the canoe heading over the falls.
I don’t think Trump detractors matter a bit at this point. I’m never Trump (and getting to the point where I am thinking about not voting for any Republican who’s endorsed him) – my small opinion matters little but it doesn’t really seem to matter what the higher profile never Trump people I’ve been reading say. The “he’s not her” argument will probably win the day. I hope he’s better than I think he will be.
We don’t know exactly what prompted Cruz to wait until 3 days before THE debate to say he will vote for Trump. He could have made the same decision and gone public with it at the convention. Despite the reasons he gave – thoughtful prayer, etc. – the only reason I can think of to prompt this is that conditions have materially changed. Is it a calculated political decision based on the prospect that Trump could now actually win and he doesn’t want to be left out in the cold? No, I don’t think that alone would be enough for a man like Cruz to go back on his principles and display such a lack of integrity. To force him into open and public humiliation it must be something else that has happened recently. Have the recent events in Charlotte, and elsewhere this past year, convinced him that the election of Clinton must be stopped at all cost? The prospect of civil strife and chaos spreading, and the eventual push back and civil war ensuing, might indeed be enough of a reason. I keep seeing the white guy who drove into the protest in Charlotte with a gun in his left hand hanging out the window, taunting the crowd. You know what WILL happen if this keeps up. The lines at gun shops tell us people are preparing.
The Other Chuck:
I can think of one excellent reason he waited. Actually, two.
At the convention, Trump’s insults towards Cruz’s family were fresh. It would have been difficult if not impossible to have endorsed him until time had passed and things had cooled down.
Plus (and perhaps even more importantly) Trump’s demeanor only improved at some time after the convention. It’s been a marked change, much written about.
Makes sense to me.
It takes one to vote for one, I always say.
‘there is nothing really beyond the pale when it comes to winning short of simply rigging the vote- that is just simple reality.’
So murder is ok, if you it lets you win? Seriously?
And if that’s so, does it apply to other professions? Is medicine, accounting or law bean bag (or not)? If so, (or not) why? Why should politics follow different rules? What gives politicians the right do dishonesty the rest of us don’t have?
‘It’s been a marked change, much written about.’
His demeanor has changed but his character has not.
“‘It’s been a marked change, much written about.’
His demeanor has changed but his character has not.” – Steve D
Right.
A carefully painted lemon might appear to be an orange (an odd shaped one, at that), and fool a few people, but it doesn’t make the lemon taste like an orange when consumed.
After approximately a year of campaigning in the way trump has, saying what he has, mutable as that all has been, one month of “looking presidential” shouldn’t be all that convincing – yet, sadly it seems to be.
Well, maybe not completely so, the “deplorable” comment may actually be sticking to trump…
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article103507052.html
A little something to inspire those of us who just cannot abide either trump or clinton for POTUS…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvlTJrNJ5lA
And something we’d have liked to see in Cruz, given what he has argued (up to last Friday, that is).
Steve D,
You should get a job with the mainstream media- you would fit right in.
I thought it was understood that I was talking about political debate, but I guess I was wrong.
Yancey Ward,
Somehow you managed to latch on to my rhetoric and miss my main point so I’ll state it simply:
Why do we have lower standards for politicians than other professions? If politics was bean bag we’d get better leaders.
Instead we continue to vote for the lesser of two evils over and over again and then wonder why that ‘lesser of two evils’ gets worse each election.
Do you think if either Clinton or Trump went for a job interview and behaved the way they do there would be any chance of them getting hired. But if you think Clinton and Trump are bad and you vote one them in, then just wait for the next election. You haven’t seen anything yet. The next iteration of Trump will make this one seem like an angel.
What I object the most about Trump is not the man himself or even his followers but what is says about the country. The US has been on a trajectory toward tyranny for a long time, a the election of Trump will be another milestone on the journey.
“Why do we have lower standards for politicians than other professions?” – Steve D
I’d go one step further and ask why is it that we can find acceptable people whom, if these two candidates were our next door neighbor, we couldn’t trust either of them on minor things, let alone partnering with them in a major investment from our life savings?
Yet, the POTUS can have so much more impact on our lives.
.
“What I object the most about Trump is not the man himself or even his followers but what it says about the country. The US has been on a trajectory toward tyranny for a long time, and the election of Trump will be another milestone on the journey.”
Was amazed in 2012 that so many couldn’t muster the wherewithal to pull the lever for Romney (many arguing Romney = obama), and somehow the nation saw fit to choose four more years of obama.
Then, four years later, amazed again at how easily the nation is paralyzed into a binary choice of two of the worst candidates ever for POTUS (certainly true on the GOP side), and rather early on.
.
If ever in my lifetime there was a GOP candidate who promises to be a leftist, big government, expansive executive powers candidate, this one is it – by several orders of magnitude.
And the big argument is all is good since he is “our” leftist, big government, expansive executive powers candidate and not the “other” leftist, big government, expansive executive powers candidate, who must be stopped in her leftist G-march, so it is “obvious” he is “better”. Essentially a red team vs blue team argument.
Few see that BOTH are leading down the same essential path, setting (potentially accelerating beyond any dem could, I would argue, in the case of trump) the stage for some future tyranny, with the unknown risk on trump as to how much tyranny or damage he might bring on during his own term, intentionally or not, if elected.
Some rationalize that, along with several attendant assumptions, as a “plan”, whereas it sure appears to be the ultimate in compromise of one’s claimed principles, and one wilda** gamble to boot, in the name of preserving or bringing the country back to ones own principles.
Big Maq:
What is rewarded is repeated.
So now the RHC serves up the worst potential POTUS in the last 100 years, and the argument for him is “well he isn’t her.” Because winning is all that matters, Pyrrhic victory.
Neo, I wasn’t going to respond to your facile answer above explaining why you think Cruz changed his mind at the last minute and endorsed Trump. But the more I think about it, the less sense it makes.
Personal insults of the nature Trump leveled against Heidi Cruz and Ted’s father Rafael, cannot be forgiven without an open and contrite apology coming from Trump. That has never happened. In years past any man of honor would have challenged a blackguard like TD to a duel over it. To end up endorsing him is unthinkable under the circumstances. It makes Ted Cruz almost complicit in the defamation of the mother of his children and his father. It destroys his own honor and integrity.
Why? Waiting 3 months or 3 years doesn’t change anything.
And to your second point that Trump has mellowed since the primary thus allowing Cruz to overlook his past nastiness, that rings very hollow. After all you’ve written about the essential nature of Trump in the past, how he will never change deep down given his age and a lifetime of such behavior, to now suddenly say that his demeanor has changed means absolutely nothing. So what if he is acting presidential. You and I both know it’s and act for benefit of the rubes.
I never thought I’d be forced to say this to someone I generally admire, but you are being dishonest – either to yourself, or to your readers. You are defending the indefensible. And your arguments do not work.
The Other Chuck:
I’m not being dishonest to anyone. I’m being very very honest. And I don’t agree with you. Plus, my answer is the opposite of facile. It is based on my own soul-searching ever since Trump became the nominee.
It has been very very difficult. Very. I still am not 100% sure what I will do. But I may vote for Trump, a man I find abominable. I would never have imagined such a thing possible.
But one thing I’ve been very happy about is that I am not a politician such as Cruz, having to make this decision when it is both public and personal (in terms of Trump directly insulting me or my family). It would be that much more difficult. I think you are simplifying the dilemma—the really deep dilemma—that faces Cruz in particular.
In addition—it’s interesting that you say “Personal insults of the nature Trump leveled against Heidi Cruz and Ted’s father Rafael, cannot be forgiven without an open and contrite apology coming from Trump.” Are you, by any chance, not Christian? The Christian attitude towards forgiveness—at least, as I understand it—is that apologies are not necessary for forgiveness at all, and that forgiveness is a personal thing in the heart and soul of the Christian. (Judaism is more focused than Christianity on apologies from the offender, but even Judaism allows forgiveness of an unrepentant offender although it does not require or even encourage it).
Cruz is a Christian, and he is doing something recognized as being Christian. Plus, he is doing it for the greater good, in his opinion. It is very very much a lesser of two evils thing.
Here is what Cruz said about it:
If you haven’t read Cruz’s statement in its entirety (the link is in the post), please go there. But I think the most important part is this:
To me, his words ring true to what he honestly believes. It’s what countless people on this blog and elsewhere who cannot stomach Trump have said, too.
You don’t have to like my arguments or believe them. And no doubt they don’t work for you. But they “work” for me and many other people, and they make sense. I happen to think they are also correct.
“Had I but world enough and time,
This coyness, Ted, would be no crime…”
Heh, Richard! Concise and perfect.
Some would say that Cruz exhibits a disrespect for his professed religion by using it as a subterfuge.
Neo:
Correct regarding Christianity and forgiveness; Other Chuck well that is otherwise since for a Trumpista it appears that concession is not sufficient, submission is required, or absolute destruction. Kind of like the Moslem approach to opposition.
IDK if it is merely a simple realization that trump would be “better”.
As mentioned, politicians have different motivation.
I have come to learn that Cruz’s biggest (by far) financial backer were the Mercer family, that Kellyanne Conway was in charge of one of their four funded super PACs, that Mercer has since turned to supporting trump, and that, surprise!, Mercer had / has investment in Breitbart.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/19/us/politics/robert-mercer-donald-trump-donor.html?_r=0
Now Cruz may well have come to his conclusion, that he feels he can better “influence” where this heads, should trump win, by being “in the game”, than being ostracized. Cruz already has made enough enemies on Capitol Hill, and being on the “wrong” side of this (in the eyes of his backers) would not help in his fight for the cause.
We can never know what is in Cruz’s head, but we cannot disregard the incentives that they have to navigate.
I also happen to think that, although politicians always have tactical/strategic aspects for their decisions, and that the same is probably true for Cruz as well, I also happen to think he is one of the most reluctant of reluctant Trump supporters but that he means what he says and that neverHillary finally won him over.” [Neo]
Cruz may well be reluctant. Regardless, the reality of this election is succinctly summed by a quote from Milton Friedman which I have posted here before:
Now our #NeverTrump commenters may see Trump as a “wrong person”, but IMO he has shown strong indication that he recognizes the political profitability of doing what many conservatives believe is the right thing as opposed to the ideologically dogmatic Mrs. Clinton who has already written off 25% of the U.S. population as irredeemable (and therefore not worthy of being represented by her presidency).