Posted on 02/05/2016 7:23:22 PM PST by TBP
IMHO, the entire affair is similar to 007 shooting at his adversaries in one direction, then turning the opposite direction and shooting at some other adversaries, then letting them shoot it out among themselves.
MSNBC, the morning after the Caucus, went out of their way to label how dispicable it was for any political agenda to lie about their opposition when a campaign was underway, and then smirked between one another and agreed with the concept.
While the commentary appeared to be a criticism of the Cruz campaign staff, it was obvious from context that the MSNBC staff themselves were contriving the false accusations, and thought it was hilarious, smirking between one another, that they could falsely accuse others during the campaign, while pointing the fingers at the innocent, and never be held accountable.
IMHO, the liberal media, once they had identified who the conservatives were likely to support, engaged in dirty politics to start false rumors and enjoy the conservatives fight among ourselves.
IMHO, the only real winner here is Trump, when he refused to follow the accusation trail any more.
I say this even though I tend to support Cruz more than Trump.
RE: You are speculating, as am I.
YEP. And yes, the polls are wrong. Therefore, Carson did BETTER than expected. That’s all I’m saying.
You make the point yourself and the word that Ted Cruz is evil started at your fingers. I said the Ted Cruz campaign follies and no where did I attack Ted Cruz personally. Ted Cruz is no more evil then other good men But he is flawed too as all men. It was a shrewd political trick and it makes Ted Cruz look Shifty. The trick was a personal sin against Dr. Ben Carson and Ted Cruz being the head of the organization is ultimately responsible. I was not bothered by the trick as much as I am bothered by Cruz supporters attempt to make it clean by casting blame at others. I think Ted is going to have weeks of bitterness for the sweets of one night.
Ok, then that is suspect as to why he said anything in the first place.
I wish it were so. I never believe the “lame stream media” I check around differences and inconstancy. I find it hard to believe Ted Cruz campaign drew on and believed main stream media.
At the point of it being announced, his staff had the opportunity to STOP the voting and make the correction, all those that MAY (big if there) have changed their minds would have the chance to change back to Carson.
All this nonsense is going nowhere anyway, it's getting tiresome to rehash when there is no there there.
Like I’ve said several times: Dr. Carson, when is Senator Cruz going to receive his apology ..?????????????
The campaign has no responsibility then to ensure their information that is being handed out is correct an truthful?
I thought that is why main stream media earned the name lame steam media for putting out bad information. The information that Ted Cruz campaign put out was right before caucus voting. Sounds like phony excuse.
In my opinion, that could also describe the communications flying about on the night of the Iowa caucus...
There was too much info flying around from multiple sources just on this issue alone. Imagine all the other info flying around, fast & furious, on the night of the Iowa caucus and trying to collate the data in real time. Think "fog of war".
Carson's camp (I'm looking right at you, Armstrong Williams) shot itself in both feet and both hands with atrociously poor communications control. It was so bad that one could almost think it was a lame - very lame - attempt at a PsyOps action by the Carson camp.
Both RUBIO and CRUZ ran with the info based solely on news reports without any due-diligence, most likely because time was of the essence during the midst of an active caucus.
Both RUBIO and CRUZ should have tasked someone (or two or three) to *immediately* verify the info with Carson's campaign leadership. But they didn't. They stayed on social media with it and just added to the whirlwind of tweets & posts swirling about.
Carson's camp should have tasked someone with contacting the leadership of all other campaigns & major media to clarify and correct the bad info they spawned as soon as they became aware it was spinning out of their control. But they didn't. They stayed on social media with it and just added to the whirlwind of tweets & posts swirling about.
What I DO NOT believe happened was that either the major media, Rubio or Cruz staff looked at Carson's tweet and thought to themselves: "... Hey! Everyone look at this quickly!! Carson's camp just tweeted something that clearly indicates he's staying in the race so we should instead tell everyone he's dropping out! Great idea, right?!..."
Rather, I think everyone who posted that Carson was leaving the campaign thought so because Carson's campaign initially led them to think so. After that, there was so much follow on traffic flying around from so many different sources, it was like trying to pick one shouting voice out of a convention hall packed with shouting voices.
Hopefully, everyone involved learned something, but I doubt it. Opinions may vary...
I asked that very question to a Cruz fan and the answer was a 4 paragraph screed on how children apologize?! I swear, the spinning on this is going to unravel, it’s just too idiotic to believe.
Classic lawyer behavior, add more layers, keep throwing more at the problem, bury them in bs. It’s laughable to watch them do it as the ‘man on the street’ just does not care to explore further than ‘he cheated’.
Short response. Cruz won fair and square. Sorry you’re taking it so hard. Trump will win New Hampshire.
Why are you posting to me? I know he won, that was NOT a surprise was it? What you should concern yourself with, but probably won’t, is how well Rubio did.
You keep playing into the GOPe game, sad.
Wasn’t attacking you, I just jumped on a reply that I may have misunderstood.
The language the Cruz campaign was almost word for word the language that CNN used. So if you contend that the Cruz campaign "strongly implied" that Carson was leaving the race, then by extension you have to recognize that CNN implied it first.
Bingo
At least Cruz had people at EACH caucus.
Your post is basically a big anecdote. You have no way of knowing how good Carson was going to do, and thus can't claim that Carson's numbers were not hurt by Cruz and hurt enough so that he could get a win over Trump.
It wouldn’t have taken much of a change to affect the outcome. 4 changed votes in each of the 1500 Iowa voting places would have been enough for the 6,000 vote win that Cruz ended up with.
RE: Your post is basically a big anecdote. You have no way of knowing how good Carson was going to do, and thus can’t claim that Carson’s numbers were not hurt by Cruz and hurt enough so that he could get a win over Trump.
Here’s the fact — the RCP poll AVERAGE had Carson at 7.7 percent. He got 9 percent of the votes in the caucus. He clearly did BETTER than expected.
You did nothing to alleviate the critique. How do you know Carson didn't do well enough for 14 percent, or 13 percent? Why is testimony from people saying an entire caucus of Carson people went to Cruz because of his lies useless, but your empty point should be taken seriously?
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.