It’s twitter being one of the worst inventions in the world for a man who just speaks his mind.
if he had spent more on a ground game, he might have won.
i’m sure all the candidates are thinking things we dont want to hear. they just dont put them to twitter.
thank goodness
yeah if I am a Cruz supporter I would be worried about the fact that despite the “greatest ground game in Iowa history” Cruz won by less then 6000 votes.
From what understand from feedback of those on the ground watching events unfold, a ‘ground game’ IN IOWA consists of various precinct captains aggressively steering caucus goers to the areas of supporters for their candidate, and if the goers hesitate or seem disinclined, then a flurry of confusion is induced to disorient them on where they need to go.
In other words, Iowa is ripe for abuse.
Further feedback from actual people on the ground in NH and also in SC states that such pandemonium and opportunities for disorientation are relatively nonexistent as compared to Iowa.
I am nonplused at Cruz supporters who think that the Cruz backers that offered $1.5 million to vets in return for 1-on-1 debate between Trump and Cruz are equivalent in ethics to Trump’s demand for $5 million from Fox News. The two actions are not equivalent.
Trump raised $6 million for vets without precondition. Cruz backers attached political conditions to their $1.5 million.
To earn my respect, Cruz backers needed to announce they were donating $1.5 million to vets AND ALSO attending the Fox News debate. That would have made the bigger people, bigger in spirit.
But as it is Donald took care of the vets, the Cruz backers played games.
And I have heard that the activists in the Cruz ‘ground game’ also played games in Iowa.
Cruz activists are not to be trusted in my view.