Donald Trump To Dine With Ted Cruz At The White House Wednesday Night

dailycaller.com ^ | 03/07/2017

[pissant]

I hear you. But I would not bet against Cruz’ re-election.

[DoughtyOne]

I wouldn’t either.

People in districts don’t swap out their people very often. Look at John McCain.

[dragnet2]

Real conservatives? Where have these "real conservatives" been for 2+ decades nate?

Ted Cruz has a 96% rating from Conservative Review

Conservative review? He got the big red star did he? Is that where the big cheese conservatives hang out? What kind of prize did the give Cruz when he blamed organized leftist violence in Chicago on Trump? Get real.

D.C. Republicans didn't have a conservative bone among them until Trump showed up. These people were all part of this corrupt charade. They were never going to step out of line because they didn't even have the stinking guts to speak out against this hyper corrupt government. They were all too concerned about saving their own political butts to go there.

Come on.

[nathanbedford]

Destroy this guy and it’s over.

Newt Gingrich must be reading your mail because I heard him on Hannity make the same argument to the effect that we simply must not permit Trump to fail in his first legislative effort. This is a compelling argument.

The competing argument articulated by Mark Levin is to the effect that we are impoverishing ourselves with entitlements and, I would add as I have so many times, that we are hurtling toward a fiscal cliff and a catastrophic reckoning. Therefore, Obama Care Light does not, as Speaker Ryan contends, put the brakes on that headlong rush to bankruptcy but actually makes it more certain as it institutionalizes the entitlements of Obama Care and further renders Medicaid hopelessly bankrupt.

Take your choice. There is political fallout either way but there is a real reckoning for the country if we simply hold our nose and set the country on a course to bankruptcy.

Our hope (and I do mean "our") for the Trump presidency is to actually save the country from moral as well as fiscal bankruptcy, to spare the country internal tyranny and international humiliation. I fully understand that a failure now on this issue for Trump will be damaging to his presidency. But for him to succeed in this will be damaging to the country and I do not make a 100% correlation between the two as most of his supporters in this forum do.

As Levin also said today, I support Trump when he agrees with my principles and I oppose him when he does not. Yet Trump himself owes the people who put him in office fidelity to shared principles that Trump espoused. Yes, I understand that his grandiose promises were never realistic but voices in the wilderness like mine were zotted off the forum for pointing things like that out.

Now we are told to hold our tongue once more. The first to get him elected the second to let him govern. There must come a time when Donald Trump is held to conservative principles. Obama Care is so important that I believe the time is now. This bill will probably not go through in its present form. Good! It is going to be a messy affair but in the long run the fissures in the Republican Party are worth exposing to correct this misstep. Let the sausage making proceed even if we have to view it.

The responsibility is with the Rinos and with Trump who overpromised, not with the conservatives who are simply telling the truth. They want to save their office we want to save the country. The bill can be fixed in the process along with Trump's presidency.

[windsorknot]

As usual you make a lot of sense.

[nathanbedford]

What kind of prize did the give Cruz when he blamed organized leftist violence in Chicago on Trump?

Are you aware of the 13 explicit separate statements by Trump at rallies encouraging violence to protesters?

How dare you lump the likes of Mike Lee and Ted Cruz in with the Rinos?

[nathanbedford]

My complaint about the tweets has been as to methodology not to substance. I predicted, quite accurately, that the lack of specificity and the lack of follow-up proof would leave the president open to criticism by the left, by Republicans and even by some conservatives. The point is that wherever the criticism comes from, even from the left it will inevitably damage his ability to govern.

The left persuaded more voters to vote against Trump than Trump was able to persuade voters to vote against Hillary. Criticism matters and the gratuitous feature here is not my comment but the erratic nature of the tweets.

The fact of the matter is that the president has immense power right now to clean this matter up and he has not exercised his powers to that effect. Conservatives like Mark Levin have articulated a plausible scenario by quoting left-wing sources (now I guess you want to believe them or at least credit them when they support Trump's position even inadvertently) but that is not proof of the allegations in the tweets.

I hope that the congressional investigation, the Wiki Leaks information, or a really galvanized Donald Trump get to the bottom of the Democrats spying resulting in an utter humiliation for the Democrat party and the banishment of them into the wilderness for a generation. I do not want the opportunity to be squandered by erratic tweets at five o'clock in the morning.

The glass full is a victory, not a stumble.

[dragnet2]

You completely evaded the question nate.

What a surprise.

[RedWulf]

>>What kind of prize did the give Cruz when he blamed organized leftist violence in Chicago on Trump?

>Are you aware of the 13 explicit separate statements by Trump at rallies encouraging violence to protesters?

#Nevertrumper lies never stop. Secondly they’re not protestors, they’re paid agitators who were paid to start violence that your boy Cruz defended. Do you deny it?

[dragnet2]

So according to you, Cruz was right, it was Trump who encouraged all violence all this organized violence at his rallies?

So you agree with Mr. Cruz, all that planned organized violence by anti-American anarchist, Communist academia, democrats, black racist groups and assorted other criminal factions, was all Trumps fault?

Right nate?

[dragnet2]

It's appears nate is blaming all the violence at Trump rallies on Trump.

It seems nate forgot these violent protest were all planned in advance, totally organized and many were actually being paid. But according to nate, it's all Trumps fault.

I've seen people here blow their political cover, but this is ridiculous. Harhar ☺☺

[romanesq]

“Pence won’t turn on Trump and Pence is one of the most accomplished social conservatives in the country, especially per pro-life issues.”

I wish I shared that faith friend but alas I don’t. If Ryan and Pence teamed up to turn on Trump and push him out the door, this would not surprise me.

In fact, I’m anticipating it. Pray that I’m wrong.

[DoughtyOne]

Try to get it through your thick head, this is not Barack Obama, Al Gore, or John Kerry we’re talking about. I know that’s hard, but it’s an important point.

We trash those guys because we don’t want anything they have to offer, to become law, ever!
President Trump is a man that may not do what we want on all things, but we do have high hopes he’ll do what we want on many things.

When you sit there and pound out post after post after post after post trashing him, that feeds right into two things. It feeds the media the idea that Republicans have turned on Trump. It feeds Congress on the idea that nobody but nobody supports Trump on anything. So why bother?

You don’t get that do you.

You burst onto the forum to post your tirades about Trump’s Health Care plan knowing full well he didn’t draft a single line of it. Ryan and his allies in Congress did. They wrote every line of it.

I haven’t read the bill, but I’ve been led to believe it is wrong headed. I disagree with Trump on it. It is still not his bill, and I do hope to see him hold enough sway to get many things done for us over the next four years.

Pounding him endlessly, and tossing in phrases like, “...his health care plan...” are not helpful in any way shape or form. It’s downright juvenile to miss this on your own, but hey there you go anyway.

The following is pure nonsense.

“Newt Gingrich must be reading your mail because I heard him on Hannity make the same argument to the effect that we simply must not permit Trump to fail in his first legislative effort. This is a compelling argument.”

I didn’t make that argument at all. At no time did I even come close to endorsing this bill, and you damn well know it. In addition, I never referred to this as Trump’s bill, and that the failure of this to pass would be his first legislative loss.

You mischaracterize whose bill this is. You mischaracterize my take on it. You fail to grasp that trashing Trump is not going to get us the things we hope to get out of him.

Do you want the wall built? Do you want Mexico to pay for it? Do you want tax cuts? Do you want to see our military restored? Do you want to see our global stance and prestige restored after Obama screwing it all up? Do you want to see education fixed for the better, the EPA fixed for the better and a myriad of other things done that will be for the better? Evidently not...
Now you’re quoting Mark Levin to me? That guy has absolutely no standing with me. He destroyed himself last year and took a lot of puddin’ heads with him over the cliff.

You are one dense individual. You mischaracterize my emphasis of not trashing trump to mean I want a government health care plan. Then you run with that false premise to make obvious comments we all agree with. What a total waste of your and my time.

Now you’re quoting Levin again. That rat bastard trashed Trump every day up until the election in 2016. Now you seem to think that same guy that couldn’t have given a “S” less if Hillary or Trump won, is a guy I really need to hear. No, he’s a guy I wish were off the radio and the internet. He’s another self-consumed moron.

It’s really remarkable that you can say this, but you did. “Now we are told to hold our tongue once more. The first to get him elected the second to let him govern.” WTH are you smoking over there? The choice was Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Are you aware of that? What the hell is wrong with you? I haven’t asked you or anyone else to praise Trump for doing the wrong thing. I have simply asked you to trash the authors of the bill. That seems to much to ask, because not once have you referenced this as Ryan’s bill. Now that is very revealing to me. We know Ryan is Leftist trash, but no, you give the guy a pass to go after the “real bad buy” (at least in your mind), Donald Trump. You did loosely refer to RINOs later, but nothing specific.

Is there some reason you avoid trashing Ryan? I’m curious about that. Is there an announced agenda that Ryan has voiced that we need to be hopeful he’ll pass? I haven’t heard a single thing positive that the rat bastard has proposed. None the less, you keep him viable and go after Trump who has promised and is doing many things for us. Why is that?

You tipped it off when you made the above comment. You didn’t want Trump at any stage of the game. By your own definition you were a NeverTrumper. And now you’re looking for any reason whatsoever to trash him and say, “See, I told you so!” What a shallow individual you have turned out to be.

“The responsibility is with the Rinos and with Trump who overpromised, not with the conservatives who are simply telling the truth. They want to save their office we want to save the country. The bill can be fixed in the process along with Trump’s presidency.”
Why would you even bother to write that nonsense? You had just written, “This bill will probably not go through in its present form.” No kidding! Who could have guessed that? So all your prattle about Trump this and Trump that was just utter nonsense wasn’t it. It was all for nothing.

Trump’s presidency has broken so much new ground, and you refer to it here as if..., “The bill can be fixed in the process along with Trump’s presidency.” WTH are you talking about? Trump’s presidency has to be fixed? Since when?

He has been busily doing things we have wanted for about seven weeks now. Where have you been? Fix Trump’s presidency? Honestly, you’ve blown a mental fuse.

Your self-centered quest to prove you were right and Trump is a terrible leader has consumed you.

[dragnet2]

Are you aware of the 13 explicit separate statements by Trump at rallies encouraging violence to protesters?

Hey nate, since you and Cruz continue to blame the wide spread organized violence on Trump, would it be OK if I could see these statements and their sources?

Thanks nate.

[nathanbedford]

In your #131 you purported to refute my assertion that Ted Cruz is a "real" conservative when I cited as evidence that "Ted Cruz has a 96% rating from Conservative Review"

You then said,

Conservative review? He got the big red star did he? Is that where the big cheese conservatives hang out? What kind of prize did the give Cruz when he blamed organized leftist violence in Chicago on Trump? Get real.

I am not clear why blaming Trump for violence, even if done disingenuously by Cruz, somehow refutes the argument that Cruz is conservative. I do not understand why that is a test of conservatism. But it seems to be your test. I suppose in your mind you equate the existence of Donald Trump, right or wrong, calling from violence or not, with conservatism.

But, sadly, I chose chose to play your game and said that there are 13 explicit examples of Trump encouraging violence at his rallies. You now want me to cite them for you.

Maybe I was lying and do not have them, why don't you you call my bluff? But if you do demand the 13 examples you must first tell me that you will withdraw your nonsense about Ted Cruz not being a conservative when I produce them. I am not asking you to abandon your idolization of Donald Trump, that is psychologically impossible, merely to climb down from your venomous hatred of Ted Cruz. (Not very pleasant to be called a hater is it? A deplorable practice but one I am learning to become quite familiar with by becoming its victim)

What is it going to be?

[nathanbedford]

In your #131 you purported to refute my assertion that Ted Cruz is a "real" conservative when I cited as evidence that "Ted Cruz has a 96% rating from Conservative Review"

You then said,

Conservative review? He got the big red star did he? Is that where the big cheese conservatives hang out? What kind of prize did the give Cruz when he blamed organized leftist violence in Chicago on Trump? Get real.

I am not clear why blaming Trump for violence, even if done disingenuously by Cruz, somehow refutes the argument that Cruz is conservative. I do not understand why that is a test of conservatism. But it seems to be your test. I suppose in your mind you equate the existence of Donald Trump, right or wrong, calling from violence or not, with conservatism.

But, sadly, I chose chose to play your game and said that there are 13 explicit examples of Trump encouraging violence at his rallies. You now want me to cite them for you.

Maybe I was lying and do not have them, why don't you you call my bluff? But if you do demand the 13 examples you must first tell me that you will withdraw your nonsense about Ted Cruz not being a conservative when I produce them. I am not asking you to abandon your idolization of Donald Trump, that is psychologically impossible, merely to climb down from your venomous hatred of Ted Cruz. (Not very pleasant to be called a hater is it? A deplorable practice but one I am learning to become quite familiar with by becoming its victim)

What is it going to be?

[nathanbedford]

In your #131 you purported to refute my assertion that Ted Cruz is a "real" conservative when I cited as evidence that "Ted Cruz has a 96% rating from Conservative Review"

You then said,

Conservative review? He got the big red star did he? Is that where the big cheese conservatives hang out? What kind of prize did the give Cruz when he blamed organized leftist violence in Chicago on Trump? Get real.

I am not clear why blaming Trump for violence, even if done disingenuously by Cruz, somehow refutes the argument that Cruz is conservative. I do not understand why that is a test of conservatism. But it seems to be your test. I suppose in your mind you equate the existence of Donald Trump, right or wrong, calling from violence or not, with conservatism.

But, sadly, I chose chose to play your game and said that there are 13 explicit examples of Trump encouraging violence at his rallies. You now want me to cite them for you.

Maybe I was lying and do not have them, why don't you you call my bluff? But if you do demand the 13 examples you must first tell me that you will withdraw your nonsense about Ted Cruz not being a conservative when I produce them. I am not asking you to abandon your idolization of Donald Trump, that is psychologically impossible, merely to climb down from your venomous hatred of Ted Cruz. (Not very pleasant to be called a hater is it? A deplorable practice but one I am learning to become quite familiar with by becoming its victim)

What is it going to be?

[dragnet2]

Wow, I have no idea what all that wordy gibberish is nate. You haven’t been drinking?

I simply asked if I could see your proof and sources of Trump, “Explicitly encouraging violence”.

[nathanbedford]

#Nevertrumper lies never stop. Secondly they’re not protestors, they’re paid agitators who were paid to start violence that your boy Cruz defended. Do you deny it?

1) I amfornot a never Trumper and I have never been a never Trumper. I have supported him upon his nomination and thereafter when he adhered to conservative principles. Therefore, I neither admit nor deny lies which might or might not have been uttered by other people.

Secondly they’re not protestors

2) of course there were protesters, it is foolish to deny that they were protesters.

they’re paid agitators

3) you imply that they were all were agitators which any sensible person would deny. The evidence is of course, that some were paid agitators.

who were paid to start violence

4) again, someone somewhere no doubt acted pro bono.

that your boy Cruz

5) I deny the Cruz is "my boy" but I have consistently supported him. He is not "my boy" because I support him only so far as he is consistently conservative. Unlike supporters of Trump today respecting his position on the healthcare bill, I will abandon Cruz when he abandons conservatism.

Cruz defended

6) I do not have Cruz' words in transcript form before me but my recollection is that he was criticizing Trump for his violent language rather than defending the protesters. So I deny it subject to being presented with contrary evidence. But the evidence should so that (A) Trump never uttered calls for violence and (B) Cruz defended all the protesters. (C) that Cruz' state of mind when he uttered the words you find allegedly in support of the protesters was that he was aware they were paid agitators paid to foment violence rather than rambunctious protesters.

[nathanbedford]

I simply asked if I could see your proof and sources of Trump, “Explicitly encouraging violence”.

You most certainly can see my proof when you commit for just one reply to be intellectually honest.