Are we going to Cruz again?


I was just polled by a national firm and given a somewhat extensive poll about my reaction if Ted Cruz un-suspended his campaign.

Someone thinks it’s an idea worth exploring. At least, enough to run a poll on.

22 thoughts on “Are we going to Cruz again?”

  1. My guess it is Cruz or someone who supports him like his super pac. I think there is shock at the speed he shifted to the center and picking a fight with the Speaker.

    1. Matthew Dowd said it best: “Donald Trump Isn’t The Problem For GOP Elites, Republican Voters Are The Problem.”

      Paul Ryan is out of touch, lives in an ideological think tank bubble with impractical academics and lacks any real world experience of how to get things done. I’m tired of the GOP establishment fawning over him. We need a leader of the people.

      1. Dowd is dead on. The GOP electorate is fed up and quite frankly the Dems have the same problem. Bernie is 72 and he is taking Hillary to the limit. I certainly can think of several other Democrats who would crush Hillary if they were running instead of Bernie.

        Bernie is like having Ron Paul win the GOP nomination or come close.

        Trump is a revolt of epic proportions in the GOP and because he is not ideologically aligned with the GOP on every issue it is quite an earthquake across the GOP. It’s not Trump it’s the GOP that is the problem as far as voters are concerned.

        It’s the same with the Dems. It’s not Bernie that’s Hillary’s problem it’s the voters.

        Maybe this is the end of the two party system? Maybe we will see a massive shift in members of both parties looking for something new and different that actually represents the people and not the establishment?

  2. I think it would be kind of interesting if Cruz actually won SD after suspending his campaign. I don’t see it happening, but it would be interesting.

  3. Cruz is such a weasel. Maybe God or Gordon will tell him to unsuspend his campaign. I’m voting for kasich.

    1. Why is Cruz a weasel? Because he is actually a principled individual who doesn’t lie every time he opens his mouth like Trump? I guess that, based upon your post, you don’t believe that God does guide people in their lives-so much the worse for you.

  4. Interesting thing proposed this morning at my weekly breakfast:

    Background: If Trump loses all the remaining winner take all states, he doesn’t get a majority and the convention goes to at least a second ballot.

    Proposal: What would happen if Cruz were to announce: “I trust the goodwill and motives of our delegates. If nobody has a majority going into the convention, I give my blessing for my delegates to vote for whoever they believe will be the best candidate. I welcome all other GOP candidates to release their delegates even for the first ballot.”

    If Cruz did this and the other candidates did the same (including Trump), he thought whoever got the nomination would leave with a wholly unified party and would win the general. And, if Cruz wasn’t selected this time, he’d be the odds on favorite next time.

    My comment was: If Trump didn’t do this (release his delegates in the face of Cruz and other candidates), if he got the nomination, he’d get crushed in the general. If he did it, he might not get the nomination but it is his best chance of winning the general.

    Its at least interesting.

    1. It makes for good political theater but it’s a silly idea for Trump to join in on this – because he is WINNING. Yes Cruz needs to do something desperate to win but I don’t know that voters in the other states would choose him.

      Let’s say Cruz won SD and told his delegates that they could be released to vote for whomever they wanted. I still don’t think the SD GOP bylaws allow for Cruz’ decision to trump the will of the GOP primary electorate.

  5. Anonymous 10:21:

    I think you raise a great point. 30 years ago, both parties contained elements of the other among their members. The ideological lines weren’t so clear.

    The GOP has drifted to being an exclusive conservative party. The Democratic Party has drifted to being an exclusive progressive party.

    Neither party has much toleration for people who are Libertarian in outlook, pragmatic, or moderate.

    Trump not only speaks to the anger and frustration but also to those who are Libertarian, pragmatic or moderate who feel marginalized in the two-party system.

    Anonymous 10:02: I agree Trump is winning the nomination and is highly likely to win the nomination (even if it became an open convention) but the real prize/goal is winning the general. This is could be a move that truly does what Anonymous 10:21 might be suggesting: Provide the environment for a major re-alignment that addresses what might be ailing the body politic.

    The more I think about it. I think if Trump showed that type of big out of the box thinking, he’d annihilate Hillary and be a President with a mandate not seen since Reagan.

    Regarding your last comment, I think (but could be wrong) the reason candidates suspend their campaigns is to retain control of their delegates. If they end their campaign, they are free-agents on the first ballot. If I get time, I’ll try to check the rules of the party regarding bound delegates. If someone gets to it before me, that would be great as I am busy most of the day.

    However, even if that were the case, if all the candidates advocated a change in the rules, that is still permissible for the delegates to make such a change at the start of the convention and I think if the candidates were unified such a change would happen.

    1. How exactly does Trump speak to those of us with a libertarian outlook? He’s an authoritarian with a liberal past. Most libertarian-minded folks are that way because of severe distrust of liars (politicians at large). I’m not sure how Trump and his shady-as-crap political history smooth that over.

      1. My first choice in the GOP primary was Marco Rubio when it started. I found out very quickly that I didn’t like his foreign policy. I leaned more towards Rand Paul. Donald Trump was the only other option for those who don’t want foreign intervention. Yes he might go in a lay waste to an enemy like ISIS but he’s not interested in Nation Building like the vast majority of Republicans running for office.

        Donald Trump and Rand Paul are the only two that had a less interventionist foreign policy. There are differences but similarities also.

        1. Donald Trump is also more libertarian when it comes to social issues. Yes he’s pro-life but he’s not interested in forcing his view on anyone. Yes he’s for traditional marriage but he’s not making it his top priority.

          Is he a small government guy? Probably not and not at all like Rand Paul but he’s a guy who’s fed up with regulations that hinder his business interests. Many American’s are.

          I don’t know that deregulating everything is libertarian but it’s a start.

          1. Donald Trump’s foreign policy is the #1 reason Rand Paul cratered in this election. Other than Trump libertarian’s didn’t have anywhere else to go. Anarchists like Trump too because he’s blowing up the system.

            Trump is a winner on so many levels.

  6. Why would a winner release his delegates? I can tell you what will happen with the delegates from our district of the GOP. They are all for Cruz, but are bound to vote on the first ballot for whoever wins the primary. If that would be Trump, they would be bound for Trump on the first ballot. If they are released by Trump, assuming he would win the primary in SD, they would all go immediately for Cruz. So how is this in the best interest of the voters or Trump in this scenario? This has all become a royal mess for two reasons. First, the GOP (and the Dems) have long had the selection system to themselves, unbeknownst to most of the run of the mill everyday voters, who have gone to the polls and cast their vote thinking it really mattered, which in reality in many cases we are finding out now it doesn’t. Second, most of the voters have no idea this was how it worked; maybe it’s their fault, maybe not. It certainly was not shouted from the ramparts by the party elite before this year.

    And I really would like to know why, other than for the media constantly spouting it based on “polls,” that Trump has no chance of winning a general. If the media would instead focus on the positives of Trump’s view of women in his companies, of the times he has helped random people with no need for bragging about it, of the good his companies have done for the economy and jobs, etc., it would be nice for a change.

    If people would realize what a far left Supreme Court would do to this nation (and this is if Hillary had a chance to appoint progressive/socialist leaning judges), they would wake up. For the sake of the country we want to leave for our kids and grandkids and even farther down, this CANNOT happen. Unless, of course, people would prefer to have an all powerful, dictatorial, federal government which would control their every idea and action, which would not tolerate freedom of speech, which would pass “laws” via regulations, and which would of course end the second amendment.

  7. Springer,

    If Trump has a majority going in, this is all just theatre as someone else said and wouldn’t have the effect of unifying the party.

    I think you are missing my point and maybe it is so esoteric or disjointed it can’t really be explained very well. Everything I was saying to was to address what Anonymous 10:21 said that Trump is in the end the “realignment candidate.” If that is true, doing what I propose shows it is sincere vs. just a reality show gimmick.

    Don’t get me wrong. I’m ready to vote for Trump in the general and I get he is without a doubt a better option than HRC or BS. But, I don’t have the confidence he will be a reliable conservative as President. I’m wholly convinced that his policies will be the most moderate of the entire GOP field. Even more moderate than George Pataki.

  8. I think I understand what you are saying above, but it could also be a big mess. I like Cruz’ policies and always have, but I don’t think our country would elect such a staunch conservative at this juncture. Trump maybe isn’t as conservative, but he probably has a better chance of winning this time around. What makes me angry is that the elite/establishment/powers that be, whatever people call them, picked the candidates for the last few times, and even if we didn’t like them, we were told to vote for them anyway. This time around the voters picked the candidate, and now the shoe is on the other foot and they can’t take it! Also this time around all the candidates pledged to support whoever got the nomination; admittedly they believed that it would be any one of them besides Trump and they had no problem agreeing to the pledge, and that question/pledge was intended to be a gotcha moment for Trump, but it turned out to be the gotcha problem for all the rest of them.

  9. Springer,

    I guess the biggest difference in outlook we have is I don’t think the elite/establishment gave us a single candidate. In the end, every nominee got chosen by primary voters (voters who are more conservative than the average Republican).

    Cruz’ problem like a lot of people who don’t win isn’t their position on the issues. They just aren’t that good of candidates from the standpoint of attracting people outside their base. Trump not only didn’t insist people support his every position, he doesn’t care if you support him on any issue. He just simply wants their support. That is refreshing.

Comments are closed.