Cruz: is he done?
28/4/16 13:23![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
luzribeiro.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsSmall Super-Tuesday has gone, and Cruz was left empty-handed (as expected). After the NY defeat and this handful of other, more recent defeats, is he now practically finished?
Well, he believes not. Or does he?
Republican Cruz, hoping to revive struggling campaign, taps Fiorina as No. 2
Looks more like the desperate move of someone who's seeing the nomination slipping away from him, and fast. It now seems more than certain that the guy has no chance of winning outright (a contested convention is always an option, though - with all the nasty implications for the party, in result of the base's backlash).
As for Fiorina, she brings no visible meaningful qualities to the potential ticket that I can think of. It's an exercise in futility as it were, seeing as Cruz' path to the White House is now practically non-existent. Then again, this seems pretty much in line with the decision-making of a failed campaign.
What's left now is for Trump to pick up Kasich as his running VP mate, and he'll wrap up this thing. Which I don't see happening though, as Kasich did make that sleazy deal with Cruz, which effectively burned his bridges. On the other hand, I've constantly got to remind myself that this is politics that we're talking about, so principled positions and actions are more like an exotic rarity rather than the norm.
Speaking of Cruz/Trump, here's an argument:
How Donald Trump crushed Ted Cruz
"But what hasn't gotten enough attention following New York is how Trump did it, and how it will enhance his position in the rest of the primaries. My theory is this: Trump cleverly turned the tables against Ted Cruz in regard to the nationwide delegate fight, especially in Colorado. Trump outflanked Cruz. ... I believe, even if [Trump] comes up short of a majority 1,237 delegates, he will still get a first-ballot victory. By calling the delegate-selection process "rigged," and arguing that Colorado had an election without voters, Trump turned a loss into a victory. Why? Because he put Cruz in the unenviable position of defending the status quo delegate-selection process. Now, Cruz played by the rules in Colorado and elsewhere. And Trump was caught flat-footed, and to some extent was embarrassed by his own weak delegate-gathering team. However, and this is the key point, Cruz argued time and again that the rules were the rules and that he simply played by them. And as Trump continuously attacked the RNC rules as being undemocratic, disenfranchising to voters, and creatures of out-of-touch Republican-party regulars, he put Cruz in the position of backing the establishment. A bad place for Cruz."
The God-anointed GOP guru Rush is saying the same thing, btw:
How Trump Stole Cruz's Renegade Mojo
"Had Trump not gotten into this, Cruz would have been the outsider candidate, and the Republican Party -- everybody from Jeb to Marco, you name it -- would have been aligned against Cruz, and he would have owned that outsider position. He knew that they were gonna use every means at their disposal to beat him. So he knew he had to master the delegate rules in every state in order to have a chance to take these guys on. He was just planning way ahead. ... So what happens? In the midst of all this planning, Trump comes along, co-opts the anti-establishment position almost to exclusive ownership, all of the establishment candidates flop, and the only guy left standing who actually knows how the process works (because he had to know it if he was gonna have any chance to win against the GOP) is Cruz. So Trump paints him as the establishment guy even though Cruz is THE quintessential anti-establishment guy, because he's the one who knows how their process works and how to beat them at their own game, which is what Cruz has been doing. It is amazing the way this has all fallen out."
You see what The Donald did there? He took what Cruz thought was gonna be his trump card (ha!), and then he turned it into a weapon against Cruz himself, then hang it around Cruz' neck to show everyone what a failure he was at his own game. Trump just flat-out humiliated Cruz. Man. What a genius. Anyone still underestimating him is doing a mistake. Hillary beware.
Well, he believes not. Or does he?
Republican Cruz, hoping to revive struggling campaign, taps Fiorina as No. 2
Looks more like the desperate move of someone who's seeing the nomination slipping away from him, and fast. It now seems more than certain that the guy has no chance of winning outright (a contested convention is always an option, though - with all the nasty implications for the party, in result of the base's backlash).
As for Fiorina, she brings no visible meaningful qualities to the potential ticket that I can think of. It's an exercise in futility as it were, seeing as Cruz' path to the White House is now practically non-existent. Then again, this seems pretty much in line with the decision-making of a failed campaign.
What's left now is for Trump to pick up Kasich as his running VP mate, and he'll wrap up this thing. Which I don't see happening though, as Kasich did make that sleazy deal with Cruz, which effectively burned his bridges. On the other hand, I've constantly got to remind myself that this is politics that we're talking about, so principled positions and actions are more like an exotic rarity rather than the norm.
Speaking of Cruz/Trump, here's an argument:
How Donald Trump crushed Ted Cruz
"But what hasn't gotten enough attention following New York is how Trump did it, and how it will enhance his position in the rest of the primaries. My theory is this: Trump cleverly turned the tables against Ted Cruz in regard to the nationwide delegate fight, especially in Colorado. Trump outflanked Cruz. ... I believe, even if [Trump] comes up short of a majority 1,237 delegates, he will still get a first-ballot victory. By calling the delegate-selection process "rigged," and arguing that Colorado had an election without voters, Trump turned a loss into a victory. Why? Because he put Cruz in the unenviable position of defending the status quo delegate-selection process. Now, Cruz played by the rules in Colorado and elsewhere. And Trump was caught flat-footed, and to some extent was embarrassed by his own weak delegate-gathering team. However, and this is the key point, Cruz argued time and again that the rules were the rules and that he simply played by them. And as Trump continuously attacked the RNC rules as being undemocratic, disenfranchising to voters, and creatures of out-of-touch Republican-party regulars, he put Cruz in the position of backing the establishment. A bad place for Cruz."
The God-anointed GOP guru Rush is saying the same thing, btw:
How Trump Stole Cruz's Renegade Mojo
"Had Trump not gotten into this, Cruz would have been the outsider candidate, and the Republican Party -- everybody from Jeb to Marco, you name it -- would have been aligned against Cruz, and he would have owned that outsider position. He knew that they were gonna use every means at their disposal to beat him. So he knew he had to master the delegate rules in every state in order to have a chance to take these guys on. He was just planning way ahead. ... So what happens? In the midst of all this planning, Trump comes along, co-opts the anti-establishment position almost to exclusive ownership, all of the establishment candidates flop, and the only guy left standing who actually knows how the process works (because he had to know it if he was gonna have any chance to win against the GOP) is Cruz. So Trump paints him as the establishment guy even though Cruz is THE quintessential anti-establishment guy, because he's the one who knows how their process works and how to beat them at their own game, which is what Cruz has been doing. It is amazing the way this has all fallen out."
You see what The Donald did there? He took what Cruz thought was gonna be his trump card (ha!), and then he turned it into a weapon against Cruz himself, then hang it around Cruz' neck to show everyone what a failure he was at his own game. Trump just flat-out humiliated Cruz. Man. What a genius. Anyone still underestimating him is doing a mistake. Hillary beware.
(no subject)
Date: 28/4/16 10:55 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/4/16 12:24 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/4/16 15:03 (UTC)The shits'n'giggles are guaranteed, though.
(no subject)
Date: 29/4/16 13:53 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/4/16 13:57 (UTC)FTC, Department of Justice, Advisor to W, Senator - people don't equate holding those jobs to being an outsider. It wouldn't be any more believable without Trump in the race.
(no subject)
Date: 29/4/16 01:57 (UTC)That means a floor fight at the convention, which seems, right now, like it plays to Cruz's strength as an organizer and a notoriously canny operator. After the first vote, if there is significant movement away from Trump, then on the third vote (when all delegates will be free to vote their conscience) look for a collapse in the Trump corner. It would likely flow towards the other leader, Cruz, but it could coalesce around someone else. This kind of thing hasn't happened in 40 years, so what happens now, in the age of social media and 24/7 news cycles is impossible to predict. But doubtless it means tears and a deep fracture in the party that weakens whoever the winner is. In 1976 Ronald Reagan was incredibly gracious in defeat and campaigned hard for Ford, despite the hard fought primary campaign. Even though Ford was thought to be DOA heading into the General Election, the GOP united and, in a cycle where the Watergate ravaged GOP brand was political poison, came withing a point or two of defeating Jimmy Carter. Would anything similar happen with Cruz or Trump? Anything is possible, but I really doubt it.
It is Hillary's to lose.
Then what happens when the DOJ indicts Hillary is anybody's guess.
(no subject)
Date: 29/4/16 13:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 29/4/16 16:43 (UTC)People are assuming that most Trump supporters are "the GOP base." On the margins, I think there is some crossover. But Trump's greatest appeal has been to disaffected and otherwise disconnected voters. He is bringing folks into the process who haven't voted in a long time, if ever. "The angry voter." Normally, that would be something to celebrate. GOP voters have never been as numerous or as passionate. Turnout has been at an all time high. Too bad it is in the service of an individual who is about an inimicable to the traditional Republican message of limited government, free markets and international strength as can be imagined, without a name ending in Clinton.
(no subject)
Date: 29/4/16 19:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 30/4/16 01:02 (UTC)They feel like the current leadership of this country doesn't have their best interests at heart. They feel like decisions are being made about things like immigration, or international trade and finance, that will make them and their children less safe, less economically powerful and less able to succeed.
Look, Trump made his mark with this "build uuuge a wall!" rhetoric. Now people on the left like to knee jerk to this rhetoric as racists or nativist or worse. Setting aside Trump's personal beliefs (whatever they are) and whether or not he is a racist or a nativist or worse, there are a lot of middle class Americans who have implicitly or explicitly wanted our government to get serious about controlling our borders and limiting illegal immigration for a generation. American's don't like it when laws are not enforced, it undermines the rule of law which makes our country prosperous and predictable. Whether you think immigration should be increased, or decreased or held steady a lot of people want the illegal immigration to end entirely. That isn't crazy. It isn't per se racist or xenophobic. Its kind of common sense. No other country has the kind of open borders the US has. No other country allows as many legal immigrants, both in absolute numbers and per capita. No other would tolerate the illegal immigration or be as generous with those here illegally as the US is. So, when they ask for the government to get serious about the issue and then get zero action from both parties, and sometime get sneered at or condescended to for years, they will turn to stupid rhetoric like Trump's they way a man dying of thirst looks as a pool of muddy rancid water.
Trump and Sanders are a symptom of the disaffection many citizens feel toward the government, the media and the academy.
They aren't all wrong, either. Its just that Trump isn't the solution to their problems.
(no subject)
Date: 30/4/16 18:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 30/4/16 02:57 (UTC)Of course, this really hinges on California, where Mrs. Fiorina should have some strength, this is what she brings to the ticket.