At least he's not Hillary...

[GH2001]

Has Ted Cruz ever looked like a bigger namby pamby pussy?  He destroyed his career at the convention. 

Idiot.

What exactly did he say that makes you think that? 1 thing?

I saw him congratulate Trump and not say one negative thing about him. In fact he was nicer than I would have been to a man who insulted his family and constantly called him a liar for two months. That usually leaves someone black and blue.

This is another example of a media instigated non issue. When telling the electorate to vote their conscience and conviction becomes a despicable act, then we are in trouble as a country. If people in the audience were already voting their conscience with Trump then why any issue? If they are not voting their conscience, then that's THEIR issue not Cruz's.

[GH2001]

If anyone cares to read it:

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7665/exclusive-cruz-camp-trump-campaign-approved-speech-ben-shapiro

[CCTAU]

What exactly did he say that makes you think that? 1 thing?

I saw him congratulate Trump and not say one negative thing about him. In fact he was nicer than I would have been to a man who insulted his family and constantly called him a liar for two months. That usually leaves someone black and blue.

This is another example of a media instigated non issue. When telling the electorate to vote their conscience and conviction becomes a despicable act, then we are in trouble as a country. If people in the audience were already voting their conscience with Trump then why any issue? If they are not voting their conscience, then that's THEIR issue not Cruz's.

Sorry. That is utter BS. He should not have asked to speak if he was not going to outright endorse Trump. It is not a media issue. Many republicans are a bit upset (even cruzbots). And it effectively killed his future chances.
Newt picked up his slack though.

[Ogre]

Sorry. That is utter BS. He should not have asked to speak if he was not going to outright endorse Trump. It is not a media issue. Many republicans are a bit upset (even cruzbots). And it effectively killed his future chances.
Newt picked up his slack though.

I'm glad he stood on principle.  Although I'm sure if Trump called your wife ugly and accused your dad of taking part in JFK's assassination you'd be totally cool with it.

He's gambling that Trump will get waxed this election and that 4 years from now the Trump brand will be considered toxic waste.  It's a safe bet.

[WiregrassTiger]

What exactly did he say that makes you think that? 1 thing?

I saw him congratulate Trump and not say one negative thing about him. In fact he was nicer than I would have been to a man who insulted his family and constantly called him a liar for two months. That usually leaves someone black and blue.

This is another example of a media instigated non issue. When telling the electorate to vote their conscience and conviction becomes a despicable act, then we are in trouble as a country. If people in the audience were already voting their conscience with Trump then why any issue? If they are not voting their conscience, then that's THEIR issue not Cruz's.

Here is my problem. It was the perfect opportunity for Cruz to step up and bridge the two factions together. Instead, he goes the "vote your conscience" route.

He could've focused on what's best for the country right now rather than considering his own future or the GOP's future.

And Trump's people share in the responsibility for even agreeing to let him speak and only reading over it supposedly 2 hours before.

Kaisich and Bush are even worse. At least Cruz showed up.

I think that most of us who are voting Trump on here are doing so because he's our only option. But these guys are too self-absorbed to fall on the sword and do what is best. Too much ego and too many beefs at stake.

 But, Trump helped create a lot of that and now he reaps what he's sown.

[CCTAU]

I'm glad he stood on principle.  Although I'm sure if Trump called your wife ugly and accused your dad of taking part in JFK's assassination you'd be totally cool with it.

He's gambling that Trump will get waxed this election and that 4 years from now the Trump brand will be considered toxic waste.  It's a safe bet.

The principle of what? Reneging on your word to support the nominee?

Nice hypocrisy.

And in 4 years, Cruz will NOT live this down. Many, even those in his camp, have come forward as being disgusted at him.

And Cruz (and his camp) chose to play a dirty game. He got beat at his own game. Not a man, but a weasel.
I had no issue with him up until now. But he definitely screwed himself with his selective principles!

[CCTAU]

It's pretty clear:

[Kaos]

I'm glad he stood on principle.  Although I'm sure if Trump called your wife ugly and accused your dad of taking part in JFK's assassination you'd be totally cool with it.

He's gambling that Trump will get waxed this election and that 4 years from now the Trump brand will be considered toxic waste.  It's a safe bet.

I'm sorry to do this but...


Principle?   

[GH2001]

Sorry. That is utter BS. He should not have asked to speak if he was not going to outright endorse Trump. It is not a media issue. Many republicans are a bit upset (even cruzbots). And it effectively killed his future chances.
Newt picked up his slack though.

You need a fact check. He was asked to speak. And his speech was approved by both camps. He never was going to endorse. The non endorsement outrage is all fabricated bullshit. The non endorsement was known.

And if you didn't get the gist of his speech at a high level myopic view, then you are seriously lost on his one. You don't just get to call it BS when you are ignorant to it all.

[GH2001]

The principle of what? Reneging on your word to support the nominee?

Nice hypocrisy.

And in 4 years, Cruz will NOT live this down. Many, even those in his camp, have come forward as being disgusted at him.

And Cruz (and his camp) chose to play a dirty game. He got beat at his own game. Not a man, but a weasel.
I had no issue with him up until now. But he definitely screwed himself with his selective principles!

Support and endorse are not the same thing.

I do find it ironic that had anyone else but Trump won, trump himself would either be running 3rd party or supporting Hillary. Since he himself took back his pledge. Do you not think that being willing to speak and congratulating the Don is supporting? Besides even if you want to get semantic with it all, circumstances change. Maybe the Don should take a lesson in burning bridges with guys that you may want support from later. Sorry but you just don't insult a guy and his family personally and expect him to grovel at you 45 days later.

[GH2001]

I'm sorry to do this but...


Principle?   

Sure.

Show me one issue the guy has flipped flopped on. And one thing he has said he would do and hasn't while a senator. Last time I checked he was the only senator willing to use the power of the purse to stop obamacare. Which is a key thing folks on the right hark on constantly (using the power of the purse to stop Obama)

[CCTAU]

Support and endorse are not the same thing.

I do find it ironic that had anyone else but Trump won, trump himself would either be running 3rd party or supporting Hillary. Since he himself took back his pledge. Do you not think that being willing to speak and congratulating the Don is supporting? Besides even if you want to get semantic with it all, circumstances change. Maybe the Don should take a lesson in burning bridges with guys that you may want support from later. Sorry but you just don't insult a guy and his family personally and expect him to grovel at you 45 days later.

Totally different scenario. The GOP were not upholding their end of the deal. You know that. Don't be disingenuous.
Cruz got pasted fair and square.

Had Cruz won, I'd be happily voting for him. But he didn't. And the stunt he pulled, well, let's just say that he won't be getting the nomination in the future.

Tit for tat. Cruz and his cruzbots came after Trump and his family first. And lost. Once again, he sounds like a sore loser. That does not go over well in America.

[GH2001]

Totally different scenario. The GOP were not upholding their end of the deal. You know that. Don't be disingenuous.
Cruz got pasted fair and square.

Had Cruz won, I'd be happily voting for him. But he didn't. And the stunt he pulled, well, let's just say that he won't be getting the nomination in the future.

Tit for tat. Cruz and his cruzbots came after Trump and his family first. And lost. Once again, he sounds like a sore loser. That does not go over well in America.

It's not about who won. It's not about who lost.

Listen carefully. When it got down to kasich, trump and cruz - they ALL in fact effectively canceled the pact they had made most likely because they knew it was getting personal and didn't want to be held to it. I get that. I would have too.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/29/politics/donald-trump-ted-cruz-nominee-pledge/index.html

Cruz was also asked to speak. He did not want to endorse for personal reasons. So they asked 2 things of him in order to speak: to congratulate trump and to not speak negatively about him in his speech. The Cruz camp was ok with that. The trump camp was ok with that. They've known this for four days now. Manafort approved the speech. It's seriously a non issue (the non endorsement). People are getting way too bent out of shape on the "conscience" statement. You should already be voting your conscience. What is the big deal? The only reason anyone is up in arms over all this is because they buy the narrative that this was some kind of "shocking speech!!! The outrage!!"

I don't know why any of this is so hard to understand.

[Kaos]

Support and endorse are not the same thing.

I do find it ironic that had anyone else but Trump won, trump himself would either be running 3rd party or supporting Hillary. Since he himself took back his pledge. Do you not think that being willing to speak and congratulating the Don is supporting? Besides even if you want to get semantic with it all, circumstances change. Maybe the Don should take a lesson in burning bridges with guys that you may want support from later. Sorry but you just don't insult a guy and his family personally and expect him to grovel at you 45 days later.

Prove it. 

Nobody asked Cruz to grovel.  All he had to do was say "we're all in the same boat, against Hillary." 

Not "vote your conscience" 

Fuckholer.

[Kaos]

Sure.

Show me one issue the guy has flipped flopped on. And one thing he has said he would do and hasn't while a senator. Last time I checked he was the only senator willing to use the power of the purse to stop obamacare. Which is a key thing folks on the right hark on constantly (using the power of the purse to stop Obama)

It wasn't about "principle"  It was about hoping Trump fails so he can improve his own political standing by going "nanny-nanny-boo-boo" 

[WiregrassTiger]

He pretty much admits in this that it was about the personal attacks.

Can't say that I blame him but why even speak at the convention if you're not going to endorse the candidate?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/document/5790f069c46188823e8b4660/amp?client=safari#

[Snaggletiger]

He pretty much admits in this that it was about the personal attacks.

Can't say that I blame him but why even speak at the convention if you're not going to endorse the candidate?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/document/5790f069c46188823e8b4660/amp?client=safari#

He had just been looking for the perfect opportunity to use "servile" in one of his speeches.

[Kaos]

He pretty much admits in this that it was about the personal attacks.

Can't say that I blame him but why even speak at the convention if you're not going to endorse the candidate?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/document/5790f069c46188823e8b4660/amp?client=safari#

[Snaggletiger]

Regardless of who approved it, Cruz should not have spoken last night if it wasn't for the sole purpose of helping get the GOP nominee in office.  If he was pissed about Trump's attack on his family, he should have stayed away and said that was the reason.  Instead, he got booed off the stage and used that as an excuse afterward.  This was solely about him thinking he could kick off his campaign for 2020.

They shouldn't have invited him or let him speak. But there hasn't been anything sane or conventional about Trump's campaign.

[AUChizad]

At least the Manchurian Candidate was a secret agent of Moscow.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/07/21/trump-proves-hes-a-putin-lapdog/?postshare=4301469113430462

Trump proves he’s a Putin lapdog

By Jennifer Rubin July 21 at 9:45 AM

The most remarkable words Wednesday were not uttered by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.). (Really, is telling people to vote their conscience such a wacky idea?) They came from Donald Trump, who in an interview with the New York Times simultaneously denigrated the United States in terms far harsher than President Obama has ever used, demonstrated his jaw-dropping ignorance and fueled concerns that there is some fishy connection between the Trump team and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

He said in the interview, “I don’t think we have the right to lecture [other countries]. Look at what is happening in our country.” This is pure left-wing anti-American bile. We are too disreputable, too corrupt to offer leadership to the world, says Trump — and the likes of Noam Chomsky. Had Obama said, “Who are we to tell China to respect human rights?,” the right would have gone bananas.

But Trump did not stop there. He essentially repudiated our NATO obligations, which call on us to provide support under Article V if a NATO member is attacked. Not under the Trump regime. We’ll only do so, he says, if we think the member has fulfilled its obligations (whatever he imagines them to be). He’d merely “prefer” to respect our treaty obligations. Trump has a reputation in business for reneging on deals; his word is never his bond. If he’s elected, the United States will then have that rap.

Trump continued on, promising to advance the “America First” mantra — an isolationist dog-whistle recalling Charles Lindbergh’s opposition in the 1930s to fighting Hitler. Unlike virtually every other elected Republican, he thinks it isn’t smart to be spending so much on national defense. (You wonder whether friends of Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, Trump’s VP nominee, are trying to keep sharp objects away from him.) He refuses to acknowledge — contrary to members of both parties, the military and virtually every informed observer — that we save money by having forward-deployed troops.

Apparently, he is out to make fools of the few Republicans — Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Pence, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) — defending him on foreign policy grounds. The remarks were so stunning for a man who is now the official nominee that one wonders whether Trump really wants the job of commander in chief.

Hillary Clinton policy adviser Jake Sullivan put out a furious response last night. He argued:

Tonight, Mike Pence said Donald Trump would stand with our allies. Tonight, Donald Trump flatly contradicted him.

For decades, the United States has given an ironclad guarantee to our NATO allies: we will come to their defense if they are attacked, just as they came to our defense after 9/11. Donald Trump was asked if he would honor that guarantee. He said … maybe, maybe not.

Ronald Reagan would be ashamed. Harry Truman would be ashamed. Republicans, Democrats and Independents who help build NATO into the most successful military alliance in history would all come to the same conclusion: Donald Trump is temperamentally unfit and fundamentally ill-prepared to be our Commander in Chief.

The President is supposed to be the leader of the free world. Donald Trump apparently doesn’t even believe in the free world.

He has that right.

He then went after Trump for his creepy admiration for Putin, who would dance a jig if the U.S. president effectively repudiated the NATO alliance. “Over the course of this campaign, Trump has displayed a bizarre and occasionally obsequious fascination with Russia’s strongman, Vladimir Putin. And he has the policy positions — and advisers — to match,” said Sullivan. “Just this week, we learned that the Trump campaign went to great lengths to remove a plank from the GOP platform about aid to Ukraine that would have offended Putin, bucking a strongly held position within his own party. Previously, he celebrated the Brexit vote, and in turn, casually predicted the disintegration of Europe. And now, he won’t even commit to protecting our NATO allies against a Russian invasion. It is fair to assume that Vladimir Putin is rooting for a Trump presidency.” He added, “More broadly, Trump has apparently decided that America lacks the moral authority to advance our interests and values around the world. He has adopted the logic and positions of China, Russia, and Iran. ”

Sullivan could have said that this is far worse than anything Obama or Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has said. It does bear an uncanny resemblance, however, to the radical left-wing protesters marching around Cleveland who decry the United States as a racist, imperialistic international scofflaw.

To those Republicans who convinced themselves that Trump could be tamed, this is a quick and brutal reminder that they’ve deluded themselves and have only enabled a dangerous ignoramus who lacks an appreciation for America’s role in the world and for the Reagan vision of a “shining city on a hill.”

Republicans are already reacting with outrage. “Totally insane,” is how former ambassador Eric Edelman describes the remarks. “He says he has been advised by Secretaries Baker and Kissinger but I find it hard to imagine that they would have recommended the things that he said in his New York Times interview. It would be totally contrary to everything they have written and the manner in which they conducted themselves in office.” He continued, “His comments have already undermined U.S. alliances, emboldened Russian revanchists, degraded our extended nuclear deterrent, threatened multiple trade wars that would beggar the international economy and destroy American prosperity.” Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute tells Right Turn, “Donald Trump is apparently the bastard stepchild of Charles Lindbergh and Barack Obama, at once embarrassed by American values and leadership, contemptuous of loyalty unless it’s to him, strangely drawn to dictators and utterly ignorant of history.” She added, “If this guy led another country, we’d be considering sanctions and fretting about his political enemies languishing in prison.”

Trump proved Cruz right. Trump is a dangerous demagogue who should be repudiated — and then stopped — by members of both parties.

UPDATE: A Republican who chose to stay away and refuse to endorse Trump, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), puts out a statement: “Our friends should draw strength and our adversaries should take pause from this simple fact: Americans keep our word. As Mr. Putin revives Soviet-style aggression and the threat of violent Islam looms over European and American cities, the United States stands with our NATO allies.” Sasse is looking mighty smart these days.