Posted on 04/09/2016 12:38:12 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
To his credit, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas admits he is not a warm and fuzzy guy. In the town hall before Wisconsin's primary, he acknowledged, “What I will say is I'm a pretty driven guy. That has pros and cons. I have always been a very driven guy.” In a GOP debate in October, he offered, “If you want someone to grab a beer with, I may not be that guy. But if you want someone to drive you home, I will get the job done and I will get you home.”
Now it is true that the most likable candidate usually wins a high-stakes race. George W. Bush beat then-Sen. John Kerry handily on the “want to have a beer with” question. Ronald Reagan was the quintessential likable candidate; as an actor he knew how to engage an audience. But in not every election does the nation or a party pick the most congenial candidate.
Richard Nixon was not likable, but in 1968 he was offering what the country felt it needed. William Schneider wrote in the National Journal in 2000, “Nixon was no more likable in 1968 (than in 1960). But he won that year because the country was in crisis. So what if he wasn't such a nice guy? Voters wanted someone who knew what he was doing.”(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
You MUST be kidding.
He isn’t just not likable, he is loathed.
Nixon was a mental giant. Cruz ain’t even close.
Nixon did not rail against his Party at every chance. Cruz does.
This is laughable.
Jebbifer Rubin, propagandist for the Cheap Labor Express is now pimping for Cruz.
Mmmmmmmmm.
“Naps, if I told you tomorrow that Cruz cured cancer your reply would probably be “all kinds of cancer or just the kind the Bilderbergers get?””
Good one.
Cruz isn’t likable and that’s an ASSHAT.
I didn’t know Nixon as I was about 2 when he left. I am just going by what others say even on here from time to time.
You’re not a very attentive reader are you. Read what I wrote again. I don’t want to bring back monarchy, but the cult of personality around both Obama and Trump make me sympathetic to that particular monarchist argument.
Liberals I know want Cruz and fear Trump.
While Jennifer Rubin is not the first person I would go to for political commentary, she does make a couple of good points. The idea that circumstances existing in the country at a given time have a great deal to do with how a candidate is perceived is a valid one. Nixon following the relatively tranquil Eisenhower years was much different that Nixon following the turbulent Johnson years. I would argue that if times were now as when President Reagan left office, Mr. Trump would not have a chance.
On the subject of Senator Cruz likability, it is interesting that earlier in this campaign, he was soundly criticized by his current chief opponent for being unable to get along with anyone in the current republican leadership. The fact that no one in the establishment would endorse or support him was a primary reason to reject him while Mr. Trump’s ability to work with and make deals with the establishment leadership on both republican and democrat sides was a major assets and a chief reason to support him.
Just lately, that has reversed and it is now a bad thing that Senator Cruz is supported by and has shown an ability to work with those same establishment people who his opponent formerly embraced. Now, that Mr. Trump is being opposed by the establishment, that has become a good thing.
I think that it could be said that in politics, neither candidates nor us supporters are exactly consistently consistent.
Yet YOU took the time to NOT post anything at all on topic, but instead, attempted to stupidly trash me. Bless your heart.
People REALLY need to know the truth and the hard, cold facts about Mr. Nixon, instead of all of the Commie crap that sadly, most believe is true.
Sadly VERY true and they need to wake up.
Revisionist history drives me up a wall, so I always post to correct erroneous posts here. :-)
Sadly, fewer and fewer people know any factual history now. It is up to all of us, who lived through the times they didn't, to educate them and post facts!
Nobody is asking you to "lionize" Mr. Nixon; however, I am DEMANDING that the Commie propaganda be disabused and corrected; which is what I have done and so have others on this thread.
>Nobody is asking you to “lionize” Mr. Nixon; however, I am DEMANDING that the Commie propaganda be disabused and corrected; which is what I have done and so have others on this thread.
Nixon for all his flaws and dishonest nature was a good man who wanted to help America. Every Democratic president as far back as FDR has done things far worse than Nixon ever did.
If you care to know him, read a couple of his books and read old newspapers. I also think that everyone needs to hear the “CHECKERS SPEECH” and the backstory to it being given. Oh...and stop calling him a “crook”, because he wasn’t one!
Trump isn't; it's his ideas that energize people...people who agree with what he says.
Neither was he a "crook" and he had NOTHING at all to do with WATERGATE, which was NOT about getting Dem files. It was the coverup which did him in and it was a decades long WAR against him, that was really about the fact that he was an anti-Commie and his determined work to expose Commies and PINKOS in our government.
Presidents as far back as FDR, taped/recorded conversations! JFK and LBJ did it too! If you're interested in this, read "IT DIDN'T START WITH WATERGATE".
You’re still here on this waste of time thread?
You, OTOH, are stalking me and adding nothing at all to this thread, by repeating the same one banal sentence.
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.