I just want to get my agreement with this on the record. Leon Wolf, over at RedState:
Having called Marco Rubio a liar, unprincipled, and someone who doesn’t understand the issues, [Ted Cruz] better discover soon that Donald Trump is without question a much bigger unprincipled liar who has no understanding of the issues, and muster the testicular fortitude to say so in public. If you’re going to be a happy warrior who doesn’t attack other Republicans no matter what they say about you, then be that happy warrior. If you’re going to be an attack dog when attacked, then turn the same vitriol on Trump that you turned on Rubio last night. You can’t have it both ways.
And I know I can’t be the only one who feels this way.
Leon’s not, at least on the main point of having-your-cake-and-wanting-it-too. If Ted Cruz wants to go one way, fine. If he wants to go the other way, also fine. Also, I understand that Sen. Cruz is the guy running for President, not a couple of RedState writers; and that Cruz probably has a better idea of how his campaign is going and what it may need than, again, a couple of RedState writers. But questions about consistency are legitimate questions. Seeing that lack of consistency last night was in fact a little jarring. And I say that as somebody who would happily vote for either Cruz or Rubio. Or, heck, both on the same ticket. Which might in fact actually happen.
Moe Lane
I don’t think that Cruz really helped himself last night. Oh, I don’t think he hurt himself, either. But coming off the Vander Platts endorsement and that mammoth Iowa poll, he had a chance to really take command up there. Instead, he seemed like he was trying too hard, constantly going way over his time — and then he backed off when it mattered, failing to confront Trump.
.
In fact, looking over the whole field, I think the only person that helped their own cause was Christie. He was direct, he was forceful without being mean-spirited, he actually answered the questions that were put to him, and he was unapologetic about his point of view.
.
As for the rest…Rubio was polished, but he insisted on dodging questions that might hurt him instead of answering them — which leaves people free to suspect the worst. Paul explained his point of view fairly well, but spent too much time taking on other candidates directly. Bush finally looked like everyone thought he was going to look at the beginning, but far too little, and far too late. Trump kept on Trumping. No one else made any real impact.
I don’t get this argument. You don’t *have* to treat everyone the same. I don’t recall (and I certainly could be wrong here) that Cruz vowed to never go after the other candidates. Actually, I think it’s a pretty bad idea to just treat all the others the same. Cruz deftly handles Trump by not attacking him and he doesn’t need to because Trump’s support is in a fairly narrow range. But Cruz does need go after Rubio because he needs to pull voters from somewhere, especially what he may perceive as his main rival for the nomination.
.
Trump looks good when he’s thundering away. You force him to be nice and just make policy proposals and he falls flat.
.
Rubio connects very well (VERY WELL) when he’s giving policy, he’s got quite the gift. So you want to make him look less likable. Don’t think it was too effective since Rubio handes himself so well, but you have to try if you want to shift the #s.
It’s advisable *not* to treat everyone the same .. recognizing that everyone *is* an individual .. balanced, of course, with not giving in to the demands of the shouting special snowflake squad.
.
That said .. this seems like a strange criticism of Cruz .. and Rubio *ought to be* easier to push off his game.
.
Mew
This.
Different situations with different people rate different responces.
Trump calling you a maniac is something to show a sense of humor about.
Rubio calling you a liar, is not.
I turned off the debate after an hour or so and watched a hockey game (go Stars!), I take it there were fireworks after I did so? What were they about, Rubio’s gang of 8 amnesty? If so, Cruz has a point, to a point. Rubio needs to have come out with something like, ‘yes I supported amnesty. I thought it was the right policy then, for these reasons, and I still think it’s the right policy. But I promise to you that I understand that the majority of my party disagrees, and I will not pursue it again until that changes.’ That would have been principled, and supportable, his dissembling on this issue has honestly been about as believable as John ‘build the damn fence’ McCain.
.
Trump gets a pass on stuff like this, fair or not, for exactly the same reason Joe Biden did. Trump’s gonna Trump, just like Biden’s gonna Biden.
I think one of the major reasons for the hard brawling between Rubio and Cruz is that the bloodiest of conflicts will start over the smallest of disagreements.
That appears to imply Cruz and Rubio are similar.
.
I don’t disagree with that assessment, just want to make sure I’m understanding that it is, in fact, the assessment you’re making.
.
Mew
Having met with both men and interacted with their staffers, they pretty much are similar. Personally, I take the position that if we’ve gotten the ‘Establishment’ to swallow hard and line up behind a guy with a HAFA score of 94, then I haven’t completely wasted the last 9 years of my life. 🙂
Not a waste at all, Moe.
.
I will point out .. this is the strongest argument I’ve seen for Rubio or Cruz this cycle.
.
I still don’t think they’re good enough, but .. your opinion carries weight .. because of those last 9 years.
.
Mew
I am not a guru. I am a man who wears suspenders because the older I get, the more I look like a hobbit. 🙂
Do not get a swelled head, Moe. I will still tell you when I think you have dipped into error. I expect the same from you, obviously. Your site, your rules.
.
That said, suspenders are sufficiently sartorially unothodox that I approve on principle.
.
Mew
For me, Cruz stands head and shoulders above Rubio. There’s a weakness in Rubio on foreign policy that I fear would creep into his domestic policies. He proved he could be “rolled” with the “Gang of Eight” – being a associated with Schumer is not a winning hand, IMHO.
Brit Hume, who I used to like, held forth on Special Report the other evening, his voice dripping with disdain about Ted Cruz. Cruz is my first choice.
Something just doesn’t ring genuine for me on Rubio, but maybe that’s just me. None of us are quite the same as we were 8 yrs. ago. Not going to do a McCain “because we have to.”
PS I know, I know, it will all come down to how we can’t let Hillary get in…I just don’t have the answer to that right now and will, of course, welcome wise thoughts on the above scenario.
Write in SMoD.
Or Cthuhlu, if you prefer.
.
If the country is foolish enough to elect Hillary, it deserves everything she does to it, and more besides.
Better to pick a third party, because those votes get tabulated.
.
Votes for the Cthulu/Hastur ticket *aren’t* tabulated, and so are less likely to be noticed by either party.
.
Mew
That’s what I intend to do, barring some kind of miracle in this primary that isn’t then overturned in the convention. Most of the guys I liked are out already…