I think that's bullshit.  It's too early.  Cruz didn't win because Rubio was still in the race on Tuesday.  Trump's margins in Illinois and Missouri were very thin. 

The fact remains that virtually every poll has Cruz beating Hillary, and Trump losing to Hillary.  Fix that dynamic (beyond Trump supporters' undying belief in Trump's every word) and maybe I'll listen.

Hey, it's just an opinion piece, written by a talking head (who happens to be a successful businessman, conservative commentator, former Libertarian VP Candidate and recovering Libertarian/now Republican).

While I don't believe every word Trump says, I do believe far more of what he says than I do Cruz. 

Cruz keeps saying he has beaten Trump 'over and over', but he has yet to reach the minimum win threshold to even be eligible for consideration to be nominee - only Trump has done so.

After 32 contests Trump has won 19, Cruz has won 9, Rubio 3, Kasich 1.  Trump has more than 2 million more votes than Cruz does to-date. 

You still have to combine Cruz with ALL of the other candidates together to beat Trump in pure delegate count (and then only by 50 delegates), and Trump would still have nearly 50% more contests won.

Cruz just said with a straight face that he 'only' has to win 78% of the remaining delegates which is over twice his average performance to-date, where Trump needs only to barely improve on his average to-date.  Cruz then went on to say that winning 78% of the delegates didn't mean that he had to win 78% of the remaining votes - and he said it with a disturbing mix of disdain and arrogant glee.

I will go on to say that I do not believe that any of the national head-to-head polls taken today are in any way meaningful, they show Bernie Sanders beating everyone, by double digits, and yet he can't beat Hillary (I am joyfully watching his victimization from superdelegate redistribution and it is awesomely ironic).  Same goes for Cruz - he failed to take a single contest yesterday, and Trump has recently hit 50%+ in national support.  One is on an upward trajectory, the other is not.

Current national head-to-head polling does not take into account the scorched earth approach that I expect Trump will take against Hillary (or Bernie or Biden if Hillary ends up getting indicted).  The one time Trump did hit her directly a month or so back, the polling damage to her was irrefutable and likely extended Bernie's run by months.

I am still not convinced that Trump will be the nominee, even if he goes into Cleveland with a clear plurality.  I don't trust Cruz or the Establishment to respect the will of the people (or Kasich, or Romney, or fill-in-the-blank).

What I am convinced of is that Cruz is not  trustworthy, that he is not the rockribbed conservative he makes himself out to be, and that he cannot beat Hillary, or Bernie or Biden in a General Election. 

I am totally willing to admit that my personal animus towards Cruz may be coloring my judgement, but based on a review of the overall situation I stand behind what I said.

'Gimp

Cruz is really pissing me off lately.  I'm not thrilled with Trump either.  I will vote for either of them in the general but they are flawed candidates.

This is beginning to be a pattern - I have several friends who have been vocal Cruz supporters who have expressed anywhere from concern to outrage over Cruz's recent behavior, mostly with the response to the Move-On.org organized attack at the Trump rally in Chicago (blaming Trump), or his tent-revival style religious meanderings. 

Several sound like they have or are leaning towards dumping him.  Which begs the question how committed his limited number of supporters are - IMO he lacks the charisma/personal engagement that is an integral part of building a winning campaign.

I find that a little surprising, but if Trump did something so out of character from my expectations of him I could understand it.

Truth is all of the remaining candidates on all sides are flawed, some more deeply than others (nobody on our side is under threat of indictment).  Would that we could actually get good and decent candidates able to focus on the issues, and a more mundane issues oriented Primary system.

Still, the GOP establishment made this bed, and now they have to lie in it.

'Gimp

This whole thing is troubling on a number of levels.  There are varying accounts of what happened, and while people do occasionally fall in the press scrum (they get pretty bumpy) this is a specific accusation.

As I said before, if the guy did actually do what has he has been accused of (deliberately pushing her to the ground) he should resign and if he doesn't resign he should be fired - but - in America we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty meaning it should be adjudicated in something more rational than the court of public opinion. 

Shapiro's resignation is a big deal, but so is the Breitbart management decision to ask their employees to stop tweeting about something that is an ongoing story that involves their own people.

Could be that Breitbart Mgmt thinks this story will not end well for Fields (turns out to be an exaggeration vs an actual assault for example) - truth is we don't know yet.

The only thing for sure is that Trump Derangement Syndrome is widespread on our side amongst the scions of the media and the powerbrokers and would be kingmakers.

'Gimp

Or my experience getting my TSA Pre-Check number today. I waited in line 2 hours, got fingerprinted like a criminal, and got to pay $85 for the privilege.

But you'll be glad you have it when you can walk through an abbreviated security check and on to the gate without a strip search, X-rays and proctological exam, you know, like we used to do before the kabuki security theater was introduced... 

I am planning to do the same soon.  I have been on the road at least once per week, every other week, since the beginning of the year (the economy despite all the protestations to the contrary in the media) is very poor and it takes a lot of work to get or keep customers.

'Gimp

I've heard that going on 8 months now.  Trust me.  I've built this wonderful business.  I own properties all over the place.  I will cut the best deal.  No once can do deals like I do deals, let me tell you something. 

The lack of specificity on everything is just stunning to me. I just don't buy into the cult of personality.

Click on any of the Read More hyperlinks below:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions

These debates are a joke if you are expecting anything of real substance to come out of them.  I believe Trump understands what the value of the debates is, quick soundbites to get people interested enough to do their own research.  The man is a performer who knows how to create, hold and grow and influence an audience. 

The level of detail present in the debates is a deliberate decision on his part IMO, not a lack of intelligence, preparation or definition - he is choosing not to go as deep as the other guys and using the debates to meet his desired outcome instead of the desired establishment or media outcome.

Just because it does not meet your (or my) expectation of what should happen in a debate does not mean it is not working as he intends it.  The debates themselves have been a mockery of the process for several cycles now (but have become unwatchable this cycle and last), they ceased to be of value for evaluating the candidates many year ago IMO.

Do you guys think he makes multi-million dollar deals on the sheer force of his personality?  Do you think he is some megalomaniac who can't address difference of opinion and conflicting goals or work within the confines of the law and contracts?

Trump is a very shrewd, intelligent and well prepared professional who has been successful across a number of different industries for several decades- it makes no sense to assume he would approach this campaign or a potential Presidency with any less.  And unlike any candidate the Republicans have had since Reagan he is able to connect to the American people at will, especially as compared to not just the last couple candidates (McCain and Romney), but even more so than his remaining competition in the primaries.

We seem to forget the hostility that Reagan faced from the media and the Democrats as well as from the Party in '76 leading up to his nomination and win in '80.  Many of the criticisms being leveled at Trump by folks on both sides now echo those same tropes rolled out against a man who ultimately became one of the best Presidents in the history of the United States.  Do I think Trump is Reagan, no I don't.  Do I think Trump would be considered among the best ever?  Can't say, we live in an even more fractured and balkanized culture than ever, all the old rules seem to no longer apply.

I do believe he is serious.  I know he has specifics.  And I believe he can win the nomination and the general election.  I also firmly believe that the Republican Party needs to undergo a foundational reformation and like him or not Trump has been a real catalyst for that, the Establishment having survived/outlasted/co-opted the Tea Party insurgency.  I am not sure that the change I want to see will result but he has illuminated the real and pronounced schism between the Establishment and the people in a way that nobody has, again, since Reagan.

I no longer provide monetary or volunteer support for the Republican party having been shit on one too many times, and I won't change that, but as of now I will say I am Trump supporter. 

I have substantive policy differences with several of his stated detailed positions, and I find his approach to certain press events to be pedantic/repetitive, but in the big picture I find him to be the least objectionable alternative and I believe he is the only person being considered who has the ability to connect to the people going around the kingmakers and mainstream media and that is what is needed to enact any real change for our nation.

'Gimp

So, let me get this straight.


People who say they will never vote for Trump are at fault because they're not "for" something, but you're against Cruz and that's just AOK?  That's a rather hypocritical point of view.


I haven't seen Cruz going out and having his campaign manager assault a reporter for asking a question.

I don't fault anyone for voting or note voting individually, as that is their prerogative.  If Cruz ends up with the nomination (I see this as likely by the way), if I don't vote than the results are partly on me, just as they would be if I had voted.

I am surprised that so many presumably intelligent people can't understand what is going on - this primary cycle is, in large part, a referendum on the lack of actual leadership from the Party - see the two least favorite candidates of the Establishment in the lead, and their favored candidates dropping like flies due to being completely rejected by the electorate.

Voting is a deeply personal undertaking that is a mixture of policy, personality, beliefs and especially our faith (or lack thereof) in our fellow man.

My critique has been and remains that I don't want to vote 'against' the other side and take another shit sandwich from a Party elite that has shown no ability to lead even when given the largest swing in political power at the National, State and Local levels in over a century - they refuse the mandate and instead only take the votes.  Dingy Harry Reid is still essentially leading the Senate with the abject failure that is Mitch McConnell acting like a battered spouse who just 'fell down the stairs again' when explaining the bruise on her face, and we replaced John Boehner (a real coup historically to unseat a sitting Speaker) with Paul Ryan having high hopes, and he turns right around continues the same shit only with less tan and no tears.

Voting 'against' the other side only serves to further entrench the miserable failures who currently 'lead' the Party because they refuse to acknowledge that it is a begrudgingly given vote in a vain attempt to stop the other side, they see it as supporting their vision (or worse they simple see it as their entitlement) and once they have it they focus instead on being liked by the powerbrokers and maintaining their own political survival.

'Gimp

For the umpteen millionth time - health insurance and access to health care are not the same.

And as others pointed out, the Republican Congress has actually made several suggestions for replacing Obamacare, along with countless votes to repeal (ignored in the Senate).

'Gimp

There is a fairly marked difference between large-scale bombing and targeting specific families for torture or execution. Your likening it to "collateral damage" doesn't seem a good fit. It is direct damage; the object of the violence being perpetrated.

Missed my point, we didn't use to call families, or civilians and cities collateral damage, we called them targets, and we bombed the shit out of them to end wars by removing the will of the other side to fight - both militarily as well as politically.

Terrorists currently operate outside the of the sphere of 'civilized warfare' and as a result face no repercussions for their actions beyond occasionally their own death - there is a school of thought of which I am a member, that total war, as we used to practice, is the only answer to the existential threat we face.  Make sure they understand there will be repercussions on their people, their families, their holy sites, etc., and even if you don't change their minds you can change the minds of everyone around them to the point they no longer have the money or safe hiding places they currently enjoy.

As we have sought to achieve surgical levels of precision in combat to avoid collateral damage there is no denying that our win-ratio has decreased, and fear of us as a dangerous opponent has been diminished.

'Gimp