Posted on 12/17/2015 8:37:38 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
Ted Cruz does not own the media. He has some very good ideas and can articulate them very well, but to get his message out as a presidential candidate, he would have to pay for virtually every minute of his coverage.
This is true because the only possible way the media can get Hillary Clinton elected is to give Cruz the same treatment they gave Mitt Romney in 2012; and they will.
All the excitement about finally taking back the White House fades away with a candidate that can’t defeat “the treatment†the media always gives Republican candidates. Cruz can’t.
When Romney talked about how 47% of voters would never vote for him: the media savaged him and never gave him a chance to explain what he meant. They used it to inflame the “offended†to increase their turnout.
Recall Romney’s “Women Book,†an honest attempt to give women a fair chance to be hired. Romney was savaged over it and never given a fair chance to explain it. The media didn’t have to and didn’t want to; so they ignored his explanation. They owned Romney; he got only the coverage they deigned to give him. They will do the...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Coach is scummy blogpimp.
I think it's instructive to note that the first president elected after women's suffrage was Warren G. Harding, another pretty face.
As usual, Coach is wrong.
How is it you do not see the signs of the times? Do you truly not understand the mood of the American public? Cruz is the anti-Romney. He, unlike the last FIVE GOP candidates, is not a pro-establishment, deceptive, quasi-leftist squish!
“his melting face is not exactly telegenic”
LMAO, as opposed to Trump’s “perpetually constipated” face and monstrous combover?
Cruz will do poorly among blacks, no better than Romney, although as a Hispanic, he will do better among that group, especially in Florida, a battleground state and where Cuban-Americans are concentrated. Also, blacks will not turn out for Hillary Clinton in the numbers they did for Obama, which place Virginia, Ohio, and North Carolina more in play. Millennials are maturing, and like the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers, will follow their path rightward. Additionally, Cruz is 20 years younger than his likely opponent, which is an advantage.
The one issue that will be crucial is the Republican ability to aggressively challenge Democrat urban political machines. Voter fraud cost Nixon the Presidential election in 1960, possibly Ford in 1976 and maybe Romney in 2012. The one time it was challenged was in 2000 in South Florida, and the GOP won the contest. Regarding the 2012 election, the GOP did not challenge the results from South Florida and the urban Ohio counties like Cuyahoga. I have no doubt, that if nominated, Trump will dip deeply into his pockets to hire lawyers and other resources to assure Democrat thugs are kept in check. I don't know about Cruz, who may be more willing than Romney was, but who lacks the resources of Trump or the Bush family.
Another writer who likes to tell us why this candidate or that candidate cannot win. Either they’re too this or too that. As if we should only vote on “electability”. I say, pick the candidate with whom you most agree and go with it, win or lose.
The only way we will know for sure who will be President is when the votes are counted and the electoral college numbers are known. Cruz could be the best person for election day. He could be a loser.
Only a relatively small percentage of the public is really ideological in the sense of being able to define a philosophically Conservative position. Cruz is able to appeal very strongly and very motivationally to that small percentage, who are essential to field a strong Conservative electioneering team, but not sufficient in numbers to win an election at the Presidential level, without something more.
Trump, on the other hand, is able to rouse people who have strong patriotic instincts--even if most of them will not understand the strength of the purely philosophic argument. However, that does not mean that they are offended by that argument--only that it is not enough without a more general rallying of the patriotic, to control their voting decisions.
The Leftist media is going to try every trick in the book, to induce an ongoing battle to embitter the supporters of Cruz & Trump, against each other. That effort may well be their best shot at frustrating the last hope of returning America to her heritage. It is of crucial importance that we not get sucked into that effort.
Tuesday night, Trump & Cruz demonstrated that they do not want to fall into such a trap. Those who understand my point should thank the Almighty for that demonstration, and we should all act accordingly.
Anyone who thinks Romney and Cruz are comparable is smoking some pretty strong weed. Romney didn’t TRY to present a message. How could he? He had already passed legislation in Mass doing most of what Obama wanted to do.
Trump? I’ve vote for him over Hillary in a heartbeat, but I don’t trust him on anything. In office, I think he’ll turn into a bombastic Mitch McConnell, making “deals”...the art of the deal.
Anyone voting based on the ‘look’ of a candidate should not be voting the first place...
__________________________________________________________
Agreed. Unfortunately, the smoother the talker or the more likable candidate wins every time when it comes to presidential elections. Party and politics do not matter.
The squishy middle of the American electorate is made up entirely of idiots that are easily swayed by who looks and sounds better or who they think is likable. Nothing more. They account for 40% of the vote.
I agree. Its time to coalesce around the presumptive winner. It appears Trump and Cruz have some type of working agreement in place. I’m at peace with it.
hardly... Cruz is not a milquetoast pussy.
Responding to Obama's policies with a "me, too, just not so much" isn't going to rally support. At least, Ted Cruz will say something of substance which will stand in stark contrast with Hillary's policies.
I’d rather have Romney than this Commie we got.
Personally....and obviously I hope to be wrong...but I don’t see Cruz beating hillary. Why? Because the country is not as conservative as we are.
That said....
Cruz would not be a repeat of 2012...because he will offer a true conservative alternative to the Marxist cult of personality and death that she will offer.
And THAT is a victory in itself.
The GOP candidate will likely lose to a Clinton.
(Well Trump might have a chance).
But a Cruz nomination will not be a re-run of Romney...not even close in terms of substance and longterm impact. Even if he loses...which I think likely.
“If he would have gotten the votes Sarah Palin got for MeCain, he would be in office today.”
McCain got 59,948,000 votes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008
Obama, in 2012, got 65,915,000 votes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012
That’s a 6 million vote difference - and I don’t think that 6 million conservatives and evangelicals stayed home. FYI, Romney actually got MORE votes than McCain, by almost exactly 1 million (60,933,500 - see the 2012 link above).
Just a note - I did vote for Romney, but it was more of an “against Obama” vote. I’m not a big Romney fan at all, and I thought him to be the wrong candidate because of a multitude of factors (guns and his own healthcare fiasco chief among them). But facts are facts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.