Trump-Cruz 2016? What if the two biggest anti-establishment candidates teamed up?

LifeZette ^ | September 10, 2015 | Jon Conradi

[Parley Baer]

“Alone Cruz gets swallowed by the GOPe primary machinery.

But the two of them together makes a far more formidable force.”

You make a good point and I think Cruz knows this.

[usconservative]

I can see myself voting for that ticket. If Trump were to actually secure the nomination and win the Presidency, we'd damn' sure want someone else in the White House (Cruz) making sure Trump doesn't turn a little Constitution usurping dictator like Obama has.

[Blue Jays]

"...Neither Trump or Cruz are approved by George Will, Charles Krauthammer, the National Review, the Wall Street Journal, the Chamber of Commerce, Megyn Kelly, Roger Ailes, the Washington Post, the Bush family, Karl Rove, La Raza, the SEIU, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, CNN, or the View..."

---

Hilarious! ;-)

[Blue Jays]

Unlike the current maniac sitting in the White House right now...Donald Trump and Ted Cruz both actually like Americans and our beloved American freedoms.

[usconservative]

Touche’

[Fresh Wind]

The only two Americans that have a backbone!!!

Maybe not. Back in 2008, Slow Joe Biden assured us that Barack Obomba had a "spine of steel".

[4rcane]

I was thinking Trump/Carson
and Cruz helping the ticket from The Senate

[2ndDivisionVet]

Write this down: There will not be another black person on a major party ticket for at least two generations after Mr. Obama leaves office.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Read some polls, Bush is about done.

[central_va]

Cruz is ok but far far from anti establishment.

[nascarnation]

That’s a pretty bold call.

I’d think with Hillary, SlowJoe, or Fauxcahontas at the top, the Dems would use a Cory Booker or DeVal Patrick to inspire the ‘hood turnout. It would be particular effective with Hillary because the community organizers would be “wink-winking” about Hillary’s failing health.

[2ndDivisionVet]

You need to update that argument a bit. Cruz is in third in Iowa and fourth nationally.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Seriously?

[Blue Jays]

"...Write this down: There will not be another black person on a major party ticket for at least two generations after Mr. Obama leaves office..."

---

Are you thinking two decades or are you thinking two generations from now?

[Georgia Girl 2]

I’m not happy about it but Cruz is polling between 4%-7% depending on which poll you look at. Unless Trump implodes I just don’t see Ted moving up that much. I would rather see Trump and Cruz occupying the first two slots. I’m not thrilled with Ben Carson polling so well. He is not the guy.

[2ndDivisionVet]

What did I say?

[2ndDivisionVet]

Again, go look at some recent polls. You’re quoting numbers from at least a week ago. I’m NOT AT ALL concerned about Ben Carson.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Actually I think you are right. There is one Iowa poll where Cruz is at 9%. I’d rather see him at 19% and Carson at 9%.

[Blue Jays]

Just verifying the theory you suggested.
Generations is a L-O-N-G time.
We shall see what happens in the real world.

[x]

They have two very different approaches. Cruz's is apparently based on the idea that there were a lot of voters who went for Bush and (going way back) for Reagan who stayed home and didn't vote for McCain or Romney because they weren't more conservative. His campaign thinks that there are many across-the-board conservatives who've been dissatisfied by those guys and that they'd vote for somebody who was farthest right in all things.

Trump's campaign recognizes that a lot of those Bush voters -- and the Reagan Democrats and Nixon's Silent Majority before that -- weren't conservative in all things, but only on some specific issues, and that things like prosperity and an effective government will win him votes that somebody like Cruz couldn't win with more ideological appeals. Judging by his past beliefs and behavior, Trump isn't likely to push the kind of program Cruz supports very hard.

So are these two approaches complementary or contradictory? Do they add votes together or subtract them from what each candidate would get on their own? I wouldn't know how to answer such a question, but I do notice that if one candidate on the ticket is a firebrand, the other usually has to be less divisive. If they're both fiery and provocative, they are less likely to be complementary than if one is easy-going and low-key.