Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire New Iowa poll numbers

Cruz is not allowed to have successful gay friends?

I guaran-damn-tee that Trump has successful gay friends. .

Sure,..Cruz can have all the gay friends he wants. I just wonder what they're buying from him with the large donations they're making to his campaign.

Likely the same thing(s) that were bought for and by the large contributors to the campaigns of Ron Paul and Rand Paul.

And what's that?

Sure I know. He's buying political influence in order to support the causes that he wants represented.

A black president with the right message would be the best thing for race relations we can get.

No white man or woman can deliver the needed message without the professional race baiters screaming "racist!".

"Quit whining, get an education, quit raising fatherless babies, and most of all give up the perpetual victim attitude and take responsibility for your own lives" is a message only a black man (or woman) could effectively deliver. The race baiters would still try to crucify him since he's taking away their jobs, but Carson would be in the most effective position to pull a Trump and counter attack successfully. Any change in social attitudes comes at a glacierly pace. But it takes that first big push to get it moving. A few credible voices with that message can attract others. Pretty soon the message becomes "cool" so the celebrities pick it up and it becomes cool for the masses. But you gotta have someone in the right place to give that first big push.

But that's not a reason to elect him since it would sidetrack 100% of the discussion to concentrate on problems generated by only 12% of the population.

The President of the United States needs to stay focused on the economy and national security first and foremost - immigration, tax policy et cetera come under those headings. Social issues are a sideline. But at least Carson would be in a unique position to address that "other problem".

It is unfortunate that intelligence, education and a firm grasp of policy are not the most important factors in a presidential candidate - they have to look good on TV to stand a chance. The former count, but without the latter a candidate is going to be an also ran.

Still a long way to go and I'm still watching them all to see who can combine the requisite qualities.

But, the campaign contributors to Ron Paul bought blimp fuel

But, the campaign contributors to Ron Paul and Rand Paul were different and not buying political influence in order to support the causes they wanted represented?

Yeah, right.

I never said that.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/ted-cruzs-gay-marriage-money/

excerpt:

Ted Cruz’s Gay Marriage Money

One of the first things Cruz may have to do on the campaign trail is explain to his social conservative base why in 2009, while preparing to run for state attorney general, he took more than $250,000 in campaign funds from out-of-state investment bankers who supported legalizing gay marriage. Cruz in February introduced legislation to leave same-sex marriage up to the states, a clear move to cut off the U.S. Supreme Court before it rules on the issue.

Cruz took the donations in 2009 when he was trying to out-position state Representative Dan Branch in an expected race to replace then-Attorney General Greg Abbott, who had been expected to run for governor. Abbott delayed his gubernatorial quest for four years when Rick Perry decided to seek re-election. Cruz out-paced Branch by raising more than $1 million in the first part of 2009.

The gay rights donations were from two very conservative investment bankers, one in New York and one in San Francisco. While both men would be in full agreement with Cruz on many issues, they were worlds apart on same-sex marriage even in 2009. But that did not stop Cruz from taking their money – and it was their money that gave Cruz his fundraising advantage over Branch.

Then you had no problems supporting candidates who were pandering to high-dollar contributors - who were buying political influence in order to support causes they wanted represented - before, yet now it's an issue.

It's an issue for Cruz. He's the candidate who took campaign donations from advocates of gay marriage.

I thought "libertarians" who supported the Pauls were all in favor of the gov't staying out of people's personal lives, bedrooms, marriages, etc. Is this no longer the case?

The issue isn't gay marriage. The issue is credibility.

How can Cruz take campaign money from homosexual advocates of gay marriage and then say this?

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallp...ill-be-front-and-center-in-2016-campaign

Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

Any "conservative" that casts out a viable candidate due to race or gender is just as much of an idiot as any "liberal" who votes for a candidate based on the same.