So, is the candidate beholding to the one who gave him money to run, or to those that repay the loan, to repay the money he spent out of his own pocket, that he will later try to recoup by fundraising?
You could make a case for both, but I would say the one that gets donations in the beginning, the donators are gambling that the candidate wins.
The one who comes out afterward to recoup personal loss, may be more beholding, as they have no choice, if they want to recoup those losses.
Personally I don’t think either has an issue with the banks. Both are paying their loans, so as far as I’m concerned there’s no problem here. But using Trump’s logic, if Cruz is somehow beholden, so is Trump.
Cruz took out the loan(s) for a small amount relatively speaking, and has paid much of it back. Trump is currently in debt a great deal to a great many banks for hundreds of millions, will likely need more financing for future business deals, and has a history of welching on his debts (going bankrupt).
In the future Cruz will be able to run for office off of donations and superpacs now that he’s established. Meanwhile Trump needs investment banks to continue making real estate deals in the future. Who do the banks have more influence on, the guy who needed them or the guy who will need them again in the future?