Skip to comments.Ted Cruz And Marco Rubio Reject Chris Christie As A Model For Winning The Latino Vote
Posted on 11/08/2013 9:03:35 AM PST by SoConPubbie
As a Latino myself, I totally agree with Cruz and Rubio. The GOP establishment is making too much over a non-race in New Jersey. The Democrat Party didnt compete for the New Jersey governorship because they want Christie as the GOP nominee in 2016, so that the media can turn around and destroy him. Its all a set up!
Fox News reports while the spotlight shines brightly on Gov. Chris Christie, and more moderate Republicans see a glimmer of hope to winning back the White House, two prominent Tea Party stars are very publicly rolling their eyes senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.
Both senators on Wednesday downplayed the view that Christies victory in Democrat-leaning New Jersey, and his strong showing among Latinos he got 51 percent of this crucial electorates vote was a model for the GOP to follow on a national level.Cruz gave what, at best, could be considered a backhanded compliment.I think it is terrific that he is brash, that he is outspoken, and that he won his race, Cruz, who is from Texas, told ABC News. But I think we need more leaders in Washington with the courage to stand for principle. And in particular, Obamacare is not working.
The ABC report then added: Asked whether Christie is a true conservative, Cruz walked away. Aides said he didnt have time for more questions.
Cruz, Rubio and Christie are all considered potential presidential candidates in 2016. But given the dismal performance of the GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2012 among Latino voters he got only 27 percent of their support, while President Obamas was 71 percent political experts say Christies more moderate image and his broad appeal now put him in a stronger position to be the GOP nominee in 2016.
Rubio, Cruzs fellow senator and fellow Cuban-American, expressed similar tepid feelings in an interview with CNN.
He said, essentially, that Christies style may be just fine for New Jersey, but that people should not be so quick to think its the magic GOP wand for the nation.
“I think we need to understand that some of these races don’t apply to future races. Every race is differentit has a different set of factors but I congratulate (Christie) on his win,” he told CNN.
On the night of his victory, and the next day, Christie did not hesitate to gloat about achieving the kind of broad support that has eluded his party.
“We won the Latino vote last night,” Christie said on Wednesday at a speech in Union City, traditionally an immigrant gateway, just a few miles from Manhattan, where 85 percent of the population is Latino. “Now find another Republican in America whos won the Latino vote recently. Why? Its because of the relationships. You get in, you build relationships, you build trust, and then people are willing to give you a chance. And of all the things that happened last night, thats the thing that I am most gratified about.”
Ted Cruz Ping!
If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
I am Puerto Rican, which makes me an American, and I soundly reject the Latino label.
The fact that they are having this “Latino” discussion means the GOP has surrendered to progressive onslaught.
Are Latinos like the Borg?
This fact bears repeating over and over: if Romney won 70% of the “Latino” vote in 2012 he still LOSES!
Dems and RINOs love giving you a label. Glad to see that you prefer individualism.
That said, this is a misleading comment:
We won the Latino vote last night, Christie said
What Christie won was the New Jersey Latino vote. They know him and didn't like the alternative. There's no reason to extrapolate that across the nation or to all Latinos. The national divide is deep and wide. There's no way Christie will win without the conservative vote, which is essentially white, marrieds.
The question is why did conservatives vote for him?
But, we might have asked, does he hold fast to the principles of liberty stated so "elegant(ly)" by the Author of our Declaration of Independence and President of the U. S., Thomas Jefferson, in his 1801 Inaugural Address--wherein Jefferson laid out what might be considered to be "qualifications" for the American presidency:
(Excerpt, "Our Ageless Constitution," p. xiv, reformatted)
"Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government. Kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from the exterminating havoc of one quarter of the globe; too high-minded to endure the degradations of the others; possessing a chosen country, with room enough for our descendants to the thousandth and thousandth generation;
- entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow-citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them;
= enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man;
- acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter
with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people?
- Still one thing more, fellow-citizensa wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.
- This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.
"About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you,
- it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations.
- Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political;
- peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none;
- the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies;
- the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad;
- a jealous care of the right of election by the peoplea mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided;
- absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism;
- a well disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them;
- the supremacy of the civil over the military authority;
- economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened;
- the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith;
- encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid;
- the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason;
- freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected.
These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."
Now, does Herbert's standard of "smart, deft, and elegant" qualify one--anyone-- to lead us to "retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety"?
Now, there's all this GOP talk about Christie, and we must be careful not to mistake hubris, bravado and compromise for the kind of bold, principled leadership future generations deserve and America must have if it is to turn away from the "deft" and "elegant" and false appeals of socialism and forward to "the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."
What Christie won was the New Jersey Latino vote. They know him and didn’t like the alternative. There’s no reason to extrapolate that across the nation or to all Latinos. The national divide is deep and wide. There’s no way Christie will win without the conservative vote, which is essentially white, marrieds.
I agree w/ your thinking. NY ain’t middle America. NJ isn’t even like the rest of the NE states. I just don’t believe that Christie’s brash style and all the video available of his lashing out at everyone...will play well in most of the country.
We need a conservative politician who can articulate strong, conservative...AMERICAN values and a vision of America that adheres to traditional AMERICAN values. There’s no reason to bring race into the mix. Traditional values know no color. But yes, the base of the Republican party are white, married couples.
For the R candidate to win the election...the candidate must appeal to a broader coalition of voters. I don’t think you get that broader coalition by pandering...you get there, IMO, by laying out your vision that gives people hope of better prospects for all hard working Americans. Not this divide and conquer garbage.
We need true believers and not actors who try to act like they think a conservative should act, without really believing in it....People can spot those phonies from a mile away.
Christie only has to tell Latino voters that he’s so fat he has to carry euros in one pocket, and pesos in the other.
2. Flawed candidate from the get-go. It’s my turn isn’t a campaign slogan.
3. Was going to be a Democrat year no matter what. McCain played with both hands tied behind his back and then tossed in Palin. A decision John “Maverick” McCain regrets to this day.
4. Here’s a dose of reality: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/as-nation-and-parties-change-republicans-are-at-an-electoral-college-disadvantage/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&_r=0
We’re not going to turn this around in a single election. The most critical thing to do between now and the next presidency are:
1. Elect as many conservatives to the House as possible, strengthening our hand there.
2. Ditto the Senate, but in the big picture a RINO is better than a Democrat because once you gain a majority you control committees, assignments and the legislative agenda. All the stuff Reid does to us, we can now do to them.
3. We need a GOP President. It’s that simple. A guy on our side of aisle is more likely to deal with us, than resist and fight us.
There isn’t a Reagan on the horizon. We fight with the army we have. The most important point is to control the legislative agenda for a generation or more. The House and Senate are the key, long term. That’s the only way.
We didn’t get here in a single leap. It took 2 generations of liberalism and we blocked a lot of stuff for decades. That’s the history and the truth. You don’t have to like the reality, but you do have to live it.
Add to the list George W. Bush in 2000. Bush failed to win the popular vote and probably without a confusing ballot to confuse the old Jewish ladies, he doesnt win Florida. That and the unappealing personality of Al Gore.
You mean NJ conservatives? Because they are smart. The alternative is always worse. Here in Illinois we have complete control by the Dems. We just got SSM and they did pension reform for the Chicago Park District by... raising taxes. It’s a nightmare that even a flock of RINOs wouldn’t have done.
Then please don't try to convince me of the opposite.
Really, if you have such a closed mind, why are you attempting a conversation?
I agree wholeheartedly. I am of Hispanic Decent as most Spanish speakers descend from Spain, Hispaniola not from Rome Italy/ Latin. But above all I am American!
I asked in another post that someone name Christie’s opponent without going to Google to find out.
So far no answer.
Christie had no opposition to amount to anything. Democrats spent all their money on McAuliffe while Republicrats held back funds from Cuccinelli.
The Republicrats elected McAuliffe.
Kris Kristie Kreme Ping!
Warm. Soft. Words melt in your ear.
My grand parents came from Sicily, I learned to speak, Italian, Latin, Spanish and German, am I a Latino Nazi? Just axin'.
McCain had a good chance of winning until 9/15 when Bushs treasury secretary effectively gave the election to Obama. After the conference in Washington, McCain made nice the rest of the campaign. He let Obama play the moderate rather than play up the Democrats obvious radicalism. My guess is that even when he was nominated the party had leaders told him to keep it toned down and that after the election they could work with the Democrats on the economic crisis. Palin did not fit in this strategy. Which is why they tried to shut her up and then after the election to discredit her. They are upset with Cruz because he has all her pizzaz and the Elitist credentials that she so totally lacks. They cant call him white trash because he, like Bill Clinton, and unlike Barack Obama, is super smart and has the academic record to prove it.
Where would Democrats be without the voter support of criminals, liars and welfare beggars?
You’re absolutely correct.....the election is being played hot and heavy on the “back burner” while we are kept occupied and under fire on “the front burner” until they are ready to “show and tell” what’s really in the pot.
Oh yeah, hispanics are gonna fall all over themselves to vote for a fat, obnoxious white guy.
I see that you are from Illinois, which helps me to understand your posts. You are surrounded by RINOs and obviously think that is the OK way to go.
Ted Cruz, or those like him, should be the future of GOP.
We need true believers and not actors who try to act like they think a conservative should act, without really believing in it....People can spot those phonies from a mile away.
True, so very true. In any walk of life/any profession if you believe in what you’re doing/saying...you will be more successful than the phonies out there. And having some passion about what your doing/saying also helps convince people that YOU are the real deal.
You SHOULD feel that way. Sadly, in Scranton HS, one student interviewed every fellow student of PR descent. Among the dozens, only TWO thought of themselves as Americans first, and not Puerto Ricans. Very sad, but typical of the brainwashed masses who have been victimized by the culture, and government schools. Bob
Don’t absolve Bush himself. He didn’t have to go along, and destroy the free market to “save” it.
Show me, using the last elections voting and electoral numbers how to do that? GW Bush wasn’t conservative.
Absurd. Should isn’t will. I don’t like RINOs, but we have to live with them. Look at the political reality. RINOs are regular betrayers of the conservative cause because...wait for it...they’re RINOs, not conservatives.
They represent states or districts that aren’t monolithically conservative. Do the math. Be realistic. We’re not going to win this in a single fell swoop.
We have to hold the Congress for a Generation. You’re not going to overthrow more than a half century of indoctrination in government schools or programming via the media. But you can slowly turn the ship around. To do so you must find areas of common accord and agreement.
Take homosexual marriage and the latest push to get every sexual deviant a seat at the table. Push back with the Right of Conscience and the Right of Free Association. People can be bargained with. We lose when we don’t move the ball forward, particularly when the deal is all or nothing.
Never. When he won the nomination I called the election for Obama. McCain has risen to the level of his incompetence and will rise no higher. He got the job, the girl and the cash.
That’s fine and acceptable. Everyone can vote their conscience. Just understand that you vote with the majority whether you vote for a third party candidate or stay home. That’s the reality.
GHB never had Reagan’s perspective. He was there to watch the store for the GOPe. Perot cost him reelection and he’d have been better than Clinton. That’s the point.
Reagan didn’t shrink the government or even eliminate the two brand new departments - DOEducation or DOEnergy. It’s hard to do, not impossible to do. It simply takes time and a long term perspective.
Keeping in mind that our Savior is Jesus Christ and not some politician, the entire process is flawed. Better to have a guy that agrees with us 50% than 0%. You can work with them.
What’s really, truly important is controlling the Congress for a generation or two. Just as the ‘devil’s in the details’ so are the angels. We can write legislation that passes and is signed and that moves our agenda forward, by inches if necessary. That’s the reality.
We’re not going to get the perfect candidate. To win the US Presidency you need to compromise and come to terms with the powers that be. There’s no other way.
Look at the numbers. They don’t lie. We don’t live in a country that is even nominally conservative.
My mind isn’t closed, it just isn’t open for absurdities like claiming that any Republican would be worse than Obama.
Only if you think I owe you my vote.
You want it, you earn it. I'm fed up with the entitlement mentality.
Do you support Cruz and the Tea Party?
Absolutely and I want to win. Frontal assaults mostly lose in combat and the same is true in politics. There isn’t going to be a single hero and I doubt that most of, if any, solutions are going to come from government.
I think Cruz did two brilliant things, that the GOPe, including that overbearing, presumptuous Michael Medved attacked as foolish. First, he stood up to Obama and the Democrat Senate. Second, he forced them to do a lot of evil things to the American people. He showed their true selves.
That said, take a look at Nate Silver’s article and analysis. You’d study the enemies plans if they fell into your hands, correct? Nate is correct in his analysis and shows how Romney lost (despite getting more votes than McCain and more conservative voters than GW Bush). We need a few key things to get our country back:
A. We need to hold Congress for at least a generation, the longer the better.
B. We need to understand that transformations, like the one that we’re watching were and are incremental. The Left used the power of American government to undermine America.
C. They lose a lot. We’re winning on guns and abortion. They’re not supermen, for the most part their grifters and their henchmen, banditti without brilliance.
D. We need solid conservative leadership, but that doesn’t mean holding the whip or being Speaker or even Majority leader, actually it’s better we’re not. Those jobs are tough, because they’re all about finding and holding coalitions for votes.
E. We need a GOP President to be in office when the economy comes back. If not, the Dems and their capon media will take all the credit. Get the economy going and the rest just follows.
F. The Dem coalition is cracking up. We need solid outreach to conservative minorities and strong, pro-growth plans that really help people. Take a look at what Mike Lee is talking about. We need RINOs, the public and conservatives to find common ground, use that common ground to move the country back on track, back toward the Constitution.
Let me give you an example. Illegal immigration is devastating American citizens in a particular demographic: the working poor and the mid- to lower-middle classes. Win them back and you’ve got a majority to knock out illegal immigration and their rich/big business supporters. Look at the Dems and you’ll see their the Party of the Educated/Wealthy Urban class. We can break them, but not in a frontal assault and not all at once.
I’m just giving you the math and the reality of not voting or voting third (losing) party.
I cannot think of the last politician I felt earned my vote. Can you?
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.