I’m not arguing for Cruz, or really against him. More just an observation. I’m definitely not a Cruz supporter. Him and Trump were the two worst GOP candidates from my point of view, but I think the argument for him is easier/better than the one for Trump. I don’t like Cruz, but he’s not utter garbage like Trump/Clinton.
2 Likes
And if he endorses Trump after his wife and father got dragged through the mud it would show that he’s a spineless coward. I’d much rather he go back on that pledge, which I care very little about to begin with.
1 Like
McCain endorsed Trump after Donald insulted his military service and POW status. I mean, how much of a bitch can you be?
1 Like
Ya, he put himself between a rock and a hard place. I applaud his stance on principles; however, he did make the pledge. It’s hard to support someone that gives their word they will do something and then backs out when it’s no longer convenient for them.
Agreed and if this is why he went back on the pledge then he needs to be very clear about it. Right now it just looks like he’s positioning for 2020.
As it stands, this is an integrity issue for me and I would have a hard time supporting him in the future because of it.
…and that is the perfect description of Ted Cruz. Under no circumstance should be ‘The Man In Charge’
Again, I was never a Ted Cruz fan and I don’t agree with him on most issues… But a politician who is willing to stick to his principles in the face of rejection from his party is worthy of my respect. People will remember this when Trump loses, or gets elected and screws up royally.
Ya, I’m just saying it’s a double edged sword. He’s standing for his principles while stomping on his integrity, imo.
A case may reach the SC, which the court may want to hear based upon who the judges are and what their views consist of. Left wing judges won’t want to hear anything that challenges abortion.
Well that’s exactly how I, and millions of Conservative Christians feel. You’re right we are not going to get into it now but nonetheless it is the killing, exterminating of the child.
Yes, as AIDS and STD’s must be treated and the costs are high. It alone will not bring us down but it is one more thing that keeps us heading in the wrong direction like alcoholism, smoking, drug addiction etc…In most of these cases you and I (I’m guessing you work I have no idea) are paying for it.
As well they should. The republicans have their nominee the fight is over. This is tantamount to hitting your opponent after the bell. To go to the Trump RNC and totally disrespect the parties choice was bad form. Not only that he has screwed himself for the nomination four years from now should Trump lose. Cruz is supposed to have a high IQ but in the end it was his emotions that ruled him and it will have been his emotions that will forever keep him from becoming the parties nominee in the future. I’m sure Marco Rubio and other’s who have their eye set on 2020 should Trump lose were quite happy with the Cruz performance. As Charles Krauthammer said “that was the longest suicide note in history.”
Bye Ted
I already told you why I was not for him Drewski. You want it again? No…you can just go back and read what I wrote.
I really don’t understand your logic. Gay people will still have sex regardless. Gay marriage does not change that fact. You could also use your example (AIDS and STDs) for literally any cost. That doesn’t mean it leads to economic failure, but lets focus on this one specific to not get too all over the place. Should the law prevent all anal sex on the basis of saving our economic doom or do you only want to restrict gay people?
I know, I’m pointing out I’m not following your logic, most likely because it doesn’t make sense. My understanding is that you’re arguing about supreme court justices, he is for the 1st and 2nd amendments, so you should not be worried about those amendments for justices he would appoint. The other cases have been decided (gay marriage and abortion), so if the only argument is that you’re hoping against all odds they will be overturned, I’m fairly confident that will not happen, so I don’t really see your point. If that is all there is to it, I appreciate the clarification, but I’m happy with the side of the argument I’m on as I think it has significantly more ground to stand on.
1 Like
I think it will be really curious to see how this plays out in 2020. Things in the moment always seem to have a bigger impact than they do in the end. 2020 is a long way away. I’m curious if the voters remember. I’m guessing Cruz is betting on Hillary winning and he can say he would’ve been better and isn’t aligned with Trump and voters will stand by him for that. But its really only a prediction, time will tell.
Should the law promote anal sex between all parties or just between two men?
.
Like the other guy said, gay people are still going to have sex, and drugs are already illegal… So even if economic strain was a reasonable basis to suppress the rights of gays (it’s not) how would that solve these problems?
I’ve seen this movie before Drew. Reagan handled his defeat by Gerald Ford quite well with style and grace at their convention. He gave a speech talking about himself briefly and then heartily endorsed Ford. Four years later the party nominated him and he went on to become President.
Remember Chris Christie talking endlessly about himself during the 2012 convention? He was the keynote speaker who should have been building up Romney…then of course he hugged Obama. But Christie had Presidential aspirations of his own for 2016 he couldn’t be bothered being a team player. And…what became of him? People do not forget Drew, not in this game. Especially when you sign a FREAKIN pledge!
Ted Cruz threw his Presidential desires down the drain last night and he did it because he is mad at Trump. With all of his great intelligence in the end he was ruled by emotion as I said above. Now should Trump win as I think he will Cruz might as well resign as he will get nothing for Texas in four years and he will be persona non grata at the White House and with his colleagues, Not that his fellow Senators ever liked him to begin with. After last nights performance we all know why.
His political career is dead…someone needs to do a postmortem.
People are gay Zeb, its time you realize that. Gay marriage does not create more gay people. None of the issues go away if you prevent gay marriage. Gay marriage does not lead to cost as you are describing it… let alone economic failure.
Very true, self inflicted wounds cost money, but is that a basis for restricting them? I’ve already pointed out how gay marriage doens’t lead to more cost, or even remotely close to economic failure, but moving the goal posts to say we could potentially use the money for better uses is a different argument. Just curious, what other aspects do you want the government to get involved in because of self inflicted wounds? Obesity costs a lot, should junk food be banned?
As I stated gay marriage does not lead to any significant cost. Saying a something has a cost is different than saying it leads to economic failure, or is the goal post now that it helps? Me throwing away a penny “helps” lead to economic failure by that standard.
The law should not be involved in people’s sex lives. Period.
1 Like