Posted on October 30 201
Via CNN:
Cruz, a tea party favorite who is considering a presidential bid, said his party needs to nominate a "strong conservative" to win back the White House in 2016. If not, Hillary Clinton will be president, he said in an interview on CNBC.

When asked if former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is too far to the left to fit the conservative bill, the junior senator from Texas said he is a "fan of Jeb Bush�s" but added that "we need to learn from history."

"We need to look to history and what works and what doesn�t and the one thing is clear is if Republicans run another candidate in the mold of a Bob Dole, or a John McCain, or a Mitt Romney � and let me be clear, all three of those are good, honorable men. They�re decent men. They�re patriots," Cruz said. "But if we run another candidate in the mold of a Bob Dole, or a John McCain, or Mitt Romney, we will end up with the same result, which is millions of people will stay home on Election Day."

Or a Canadian?

Cruz is spot on. Running a nice moderate jerkoff hasn't won an election in decades. The Republican party needs to wake up.

If the GOP could grow some balls and put up a REAL conservative they'd have the People behind them.

Or they could just start cheating ballots like the libtards do.

I'd take a Canadian conservative over an American liberal in a heart beat.

But hell, this "Canadian" thing was destroyed when the Kenyan made it into the White House, and the only people who keep bringing it up are pea-brained trolls.

The lad hit one out of the park with that one.

Wham-O!

on Breitbart TV 30 Oct 2014
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) argued �it will be incumbent� on the GOP to stop any executive amnesty by President Obama if the Republicans re-take the Senate on Thursday�s �Hannity� on the Fox News Channel.

When Cruz was asked if the GOP has the authority to block executive amnesty, Cruz declared they �absolutely� did. And �it will be incumbent if we have a majority for Republicans to lead, for us to step up and do something about it�I hope and believe that come January of next year, with a Republican majority in the House and the Senate, we will see strong, bold leadership.�

Cruz added,��I think we are on the verge of an historic Election Night next Tuesday. I think Republicans are going to re-take the US Senate. I

He also slammed the media for ignoring comments made by Democratic candidate Vincent Sheheen against South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley (R), saying �The Democratic nominee for governor in South Carolina used a misogynist, sexist insult for your and my friend Nikki Haley�you can see this Democrat running for governor laughing about it with the crowd and then embracing it, embracing, you know, if this were a Republican, if this were Todd Aiken, it would lead the news on every channel across the country [yet] to have a Democrat use a nasty personal misogynist insult, and yet the mainstream yawns and ignores it.�

Figured you'd want another Kenyan. The first one's worked out so well.

From the age of four, Ted Cruz was raised a Texan.

As a lawyer at the top of the pile, he well knows if he is a citizen eligible to run for President.

Damn guys...can't we just focus on the mid terms for a month, rather than 2 years out?

I love Cruz. There ain't no chance he's the 2016 nominee.

He's got a better chance than that there Bush fella.

Actually, he doesn't.

Lock pick???

Hot damn....... I just e-mailed this thread to ol' Ted with a short explanation of why YOUR post should really cheer him up.

Of course, if Jeb sees it, he'll call a press conference to announce that he will NOT be a candidate in 2016.

Unlike some...Ted Cruz can focus of more than one thing at a time. And he damn well know this election is about the Obama agenda.

You are the one doing the predictions 2 years out.

Well he best snap to it.

I sent the MF'er $25 bucks.

Is Cruz going to scare white, middle-class college-educated women of all ages?

Is Jeb?

If the answer to one of them is "no", then we've got a viable presidential candidate who can win.

You'll soon find out what Jeb has done as far as his ground game and money are concerned...all under the radar, for the most part.

I'm amazed. I didn't think it possible.

Trust me when I tell you Cruz is discussing Jeb for a reason.

I love Cruz. Cruz isn't in the top 3.

In November 2016, I will vote for the GOP candidate the majority of this nation selects as it's candidate.

People who post in this forum aren't exactly a representative cross-section of the American electorate.

"I love Cruz. Cruz isn't in the top 3."

Please don't tell me Christie preferable to Cruz.

Not a chance, Gene.

Don't misunderstand my written words.

Who exactly would vote for Cruz? Where are the votes coming from?

52% of the vote is now Women, Cruz won't carry that majority

The minority vote exceeded the white vote in 2012 and Cruz won't carry that majority.

The 30 and under vote is now 80% Liberal, Cruz won't carry that vote.

The hope may be there folks but the NUMBERS ain't.

=======

I know that.

They're the ones we need to have the debate with, though. I don't need to waste my energies on folks who agree with me.

I'm trying to convince the dumb [bleep] who think I'm a dumb [bleep].

When I said this a couple of jackasses accused me of voting for obama and/or staying home. I think the poor idiots making those remarks to me do not understand what a Conservative is, or standing on principle.

Standing on principle is akin to committing suicide....only the principled end up dead.

Principle wins no elections. The arrogance of one's principle, while noble, wins no elections either. It could affect them to some extent, admittedly.

The candidate capable of garnering over 100 million votes wins elections.

In our lifetime, principled voters will not affect that reality.

How did having principles become arrogant?

In my opinion Rich, it becomes arrogance when you voted for the candidate you know hasn't any chance of beating the nominee you clearly don't want in office.

It's ok for principle to factor common sense into the equation.

Standing on personal �principle� means one put self above the greater good.

I respect principle, I understand principle but the mess we are in can�t be solved by principle.

How foolish is it to believe the Country can turn Conservative with one election. The insidious damage that has been inflicted to America has literally been afflicted by the death of a thousand cuts.

50 years of Liberalism has changed America. I�m not ready to give up, nor should anyone here, but I am acutely aware that the numbers are heavily against us.

So, where do we start? Some States are hanging on better than others but the weight of the Federal Government will eventually render all 50 of them impotent.

So fix the Federal Government first.

Obama fully intends on running amok his last two years. Immigration will be rammed down our throats and many more of his leftist agendas.

A Republican controlled Senate can stand in the way. If your Candidate is Conservative that�s perfect. If not then one must put aside principle for the good of all and still pull that Republican lever. The Democrats simply must lose control of the Senate.

A Republican controlled Senate can stop Obama from putting Socialists on the Federal and the Supreme Court. Again, for the good of all pull that Republican lever. The Democrats simply must lose control of the Senate.

The Republican Party, what�s left of it, did not become eviscerated because they failed to nominate Conservatives. They were done in by Liberal Schools, done in by Liberal media, done in by immigrants, done in by Public Employees and a whole host of those who prosper by taking away what the Taxpayers have earned.

So here we are today, badly outnumbered. A Conservative could be nominated but it would be simply one more soldier at the Alamo.

It took 50 years to get here and it quite frankly may well take 50 years to get out of this mess....if at all.

But it will need to be done as slowly and as insidious as the liberals have done it to us. But we need to start and we need to hold our nose once in awhile.

Sucks that it is that way but reality sucks.

Principles may need to be bent a bit. The Country can�t continue to back slide. Get rid of the Democrats with Moderate Republicans then get rid of Moderate Republicans with Conservative ones. If that can be pulled of there is no doubt that I and many others here will be long dead. But to stand on principle and allow a Socialist to be elected over a Moderate Republican is, as I said, akin to suicide. It only makes things worse.

I hope all of you stop for a minute and realize just how close this Country is to going over the edge to Socialism....

We can�t let that happen.

Don't you think we need to send the grand ole party a clear message that watered down socialists are - how do we say - not our cup of tea?
I always said McCain and then Romney were my favorite democrats, but I didn't want them for president. I think that I voted for both is my fault for thinking the same - that if I didn't I was helping obama. Not this time. The party needs to represent me or I'll take my vote elsewhere until they get the message.

"Purity is for suicide bombers." Mitch Daniels

Don't you think we need to send the grand ole party a clear message that watered down socialists are - how do we say - not our cup of tea?
=========

Nah! I just need to be one of the 205 million who vote for 1 of 2 folks who have chance.

If you, and gents like KWFA, vote for a candidate who gets 500K votes and you've done so for a few elections,please tell me what your principle did for us in the last two elections.

Well, I have fallen in line and voted for McCain and Romney, and I will ask you what I have asked myself - what good did that do beyond telling the GOP anybody they put in front of me I'll vote for.

So if the Republicans nominate a "Conservative" and they lose would you ask the same question?

And BTW, McCain's and Romney's defeat were not the result of them not being Conservative. It was a clear math example of how left the Country actually is and how difficult it is to get even a Moderate elected as President.

This makes Jeb better?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...uld-Pass-Amnesty-if-They-Win-Back-Senate

Again...it ain't good, better or best....

It's electability....

That was said about Romney...

========

Fair question.

McCain sucked even though he was my dad's classmate and had my respect. He was not my candidate choice.

Romney was and he got both my money and my vote.

All I knew was this. McCain and Romney, the only two who had a viable chance of beating Obama,were the only two men who had a chance of garnering the 100 million votes plus it took to insure Obama didn't give us what he has given us. I then voted for those men.They had a viable chance.

Please tell me what a vote for a 500K candidate did for our country other than appease the arrogance of principled voters.

I dumped about 12K into the 2012 campaign. Lost my ass straight down the line. Romney was our only hope of winning, right? Yeah, ask me to vote for a man who wasn't even allowed in the debates.

Here's my principle. The GOP platform beats the DNC platform.

Jeb could likely do well with Hispanics and win Florida.

Yes and as close as he got it was, as I said, a math example of how far left the Country is.

If it was Cruz instead of Romney the election would have been called right after supper....

Really,next week will then be a landslide for D's then,if the country is as left leaning as you say.

Are you being a smartass?

Jeb could win the nomination.

If Romney nominated Susana Martinez he would have won...

No, there are few if any Conservative's running.

Remember, Republicans have largely asked Cruz to stay away.

Agreed.

I'd campaign and vote for him now, as well.

We have some major-assed hard right boys at the 24H, Harry. I love them and they're welcome at my home anytime but they're frikken clueless.

Again, it's a race against Socialists versus Moderates...

The battle of Moderates against Conservatives will happen after I'm dead.

==========


Listen to this man, gents!

Interesting,the R's are part of the problem.

Cruz is doing what he was elected to do.

Would rather see Cruz as Majority leader in the Senate,than that old wore out has-been Mitch McConnell.

First things first. We need to take control of both houses of congress on Tuesday. Then we need to keep control and elect a Republican President in 2016. Hopefully a conservative one, but we have to realize that currently RINOs control the Republican party at this point, and we may have to hold our noses and vote for one not as conservative as we would like. we cannot afford to stay home in droves and let the Democrats regain the White House and congress. After we have got control of all of that, THEN we start weeding out the RINOs. It took the Communists 40 years to get control of the Democratic party, and they didn't do it by staying home and not voting when the Democrat candidate was not as far to the left as they would like.

Not if but when we take the Senate next week, would Cruz rather be the Senate Majority Leader for the next four years or do the long hard slog to maybe win the White House?

Especially if he likes and would support one or more of the Conservative candidates with a realistic chance to win the WH?

Why don't we all just stay home and not vote, that'll show 'em.

Some weird numbers posted here... but that's the 24hour political awareness average. If you don't understand the math there's no way you understand electability.

Kent

And there are all those �Constitutional Experts� that lecture us and make a point to tell us why they never vote.

That is ironic, at least if someone votes for their candidate, their words mean something. Staying home in a snit because their candidate will only get 3% of the vote excludes them from having any meaningful voice.

Kent

It has been suggested before that Gov. Susana Martinez would be a prime choice for VP in the next go around.
If she wins this election as big as they say she will...

So much about the 2016 field of candidates depends on this election...

Anyway, the most unelectable demographic is a GOP white male babyboomer... matches the MSM profile of every 'homeland terrorist'... until it's found out it was a muslim.

Ironic...

Kent

I don't understand all the love for Cruz, he has NO chance of winning the nomination much less beating Hilary.


Paul 11.8

Bush 11.6

Huckabee 11.3

Christie 10.6

Ryan 10.0

Perry 7.8

Rubio 7.0

Cruz 6.6

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...blican_presidential_nomination-3823.html

During the first week of November, 2016, there will be a GOP candidate and a DNC candidate.

The winner will need 105 million plus votes to be president.

Can we please stop talking about those in the thousands vote range?

You have no idea who might win the primaries or even who will be in those primaries.

Especially from an old poll with less than a six point spread.

Holy chit! that'd be a hell of an illegal/dead people turnout... over 70 million.

Kent

Nothing wrong with Romney, McCain, Bush, Dole, Bush, Reagan and so on. Most everyone on this forum supported all of them I would assume.

Oh don't do that! The Republican Party is no different than any other business. If you keep buying their product they will continue to keep changing, but the second you stop buying it they will keep on doing the same thing over and over.

Right there with you Ike. We need someone just like you and me, willing to do anything to get rewarded.

Yawn.

Did you respond to my post because everyone else simply ignores you?

Who did you post as on the 24H before this silly sherp charade?

Why would any principled voter stay home?

because, unfortunately, kool-aid comes in multiple flavors.

While I admire the stance, I find it odd that this whole "stay home" motif plays out the most during election time.

It's apparent, however, if the other 729 days between elections that people would get their asses out of the home and contribute to their governance, maybe they wouldn't have to demonstrate their frustration with the ultimate in dumbphuckitude aka "staying home on election day"

Is it the desperation your home state breeds or do you really believe the people would not back a true conservative?

Both you guys need to get your dates and numbers right.

In the 2012 election Obama got just under 66 million votes and Romney just under 61 million.

That is where the 5 million conservative votes that Romney needed in the closest swing states number comes from.

Hope those 5+ million "voters" are happy with their decision to stay home.

Counselor I am basically agreeing with you by them staying home they are in fact voting but for the other side.
Cheers NC

I don't believe a majority of American voters would back anybody you would accept as a true conservative.

That and MSM including conservative pundits still use the election day numbers of 57 million for Romney vs 62 million for Bush in 2004.

The reality is Bush got 62 mil, McCain 60 mil and Romney 61 mil. Kerry 59 mil, Obama 70 and 66 mil.

5 or even 3 million republicans didn't stay home. Older folks that are predominately GOP are dying, young folk are predominately liberal, minorities are out breeding us. Overall voting numbers are rising well above pre 2004 numbers and republicans are stagnant.

GOP is shrinking by attrition.

2012... 72% of voters are white nonhispanic... minorities are at 28% with blacks leading with 13, hispanics undervote their demographic.

It's still a white country and the blame goes squarely on that demographic... casting blame elsewhere is drinking from MSM propaganda.

Kent

I've never stayed home, and I've never voted anything but "R". But I don't know WTF I'd do if 2016 pres nominees were hillary vs cristie. She's more of a conservative republican than he is. Vote for her? Vote for the flaming liberal with the "R" beside his name? Stay home? What would you do?

I really don't think we will be faced with that choice. That would one of the worse of the worse scenarios.
But if...

As Governor of a deep blue state, Christie delivered his required balanced budgets and a very mixed bag of tax cuts and state pension reform bills, cutting some government programs;a very mixed message on gun control, illegal immigration and so on...he is now pro-life.

Hillary has never been a Governor.
She would run the government about as well as she did the State Dept...she has always been pro-choice and pro-gun control.

I think cristie would make us wish we had obama back in the whitehouse.

I'm not here to defend Christie. Don't see how he would win very many Red states.
But I like the idea that he has a set. Not afraid to tell someone to set down and shut up.

We need a Conservative that will do the same.

I'm not gonna drag this thread off topic any further. We've got two years to talk about cristy. He's got a bunch of supporters here on the fire so it WILL come up again. All I'm going to say now is they loved him over on DU until he yelled at that teacher.

You are right about Christie. Never saw him as much more that a stalking horse for Jeb.
Same for those who are trying to drag Romney back.

Rand Paul has sort of a set of balls when he is not flip-flopping back and forth.
Ted Cruz has a set and he don't flip for nobody.
Neither does Palin. If any lady can have a set...it is Sarah.

I hope to see them all in the primaries.

I am only posting as me. Are you posting as someone else since you and I are of like mind?

Why does it seem to upset you so much that someone totally agrees with you? Like you, I only care that a republican gets elected. It doesn't matter to me what they have done in the past or what they will do once they are in office.

I frequently advocate that a good path to a republican victory would be to get a Schumer, Clinton, Feinstein, or similar to switch their voter registration and either join up as VP with a lifelong republican like Christie or flat out run for POTUS themselves. Republicans like you and me would straight ticket vote for them the same as always and it might just get some democrat voters. Heck, even LaPierre could say that any of those people had been at the front on the gun debate and all of our fellow NRA members would vote for them as well.

Stay true to our course, brother.

Christie has been consistent on firearms rights which is why so many conservative republicans support him just like we did McCain, Romney, the Bushes, Dole, and Reagan who were of similar mindsets.

Where did my like minded brethren get to? We must get Christie in office!!

Like I said...
I'm not here to defend Christie. Don't see how he would win very many Red states.
But I like the idea that he has a set. Not afraid to tell someone to set down and shut up.
We need a Conservative that will do the same.

When I said Christie had a mixed message on gun control, that message includes vetoes of legislation that would have banned high capacity magazines and sale of .50 caliber rifles.

Christie has a �C� grade from the NRA and I think that is about right.
Hillary has a �F� rating.

Seeing as how this is a Ted Cruz thread...
Ted Cruz has a �A+� NRA rating.
Same as Sarah Palin whose �A+� NRA rating goes back to at least 2006

So you're saying that you wouldn't have voted for Cruz over Obama?

I will vote against the most liberal candidate. Let's hope we can tell the difference next time. Lots of people couldn't in the last two elections.

After the dust settles for this election, we need a Conservative candidate that will leave no doubt in anyone's mind where they stand.

Yup. Liberal Republicans have no future in the Whitehouse, except when given an appointment by a Democrat.