Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Ted Cruz Surging in Iowa, Viewed as Most Electable

The latest Quinnipiac Iowa poll had great news for Ted Cruz on several fronts.

He is surging and now is just behind Donald Trump for the lead (technically a statistical tie):

There is good news and bad news in the fact that he has 42% of those who consider themselves Tea Party.  The good news is that the Tea Party vote is not as divided as it has been in previous cycles and that Cruz seems to be the consensus Tea Party pick (not a shock based on my Twitter feed).  The bad news is that with such a level of support, how much more juice can Ted Cruz get from Tea Partiers?  He is also winning among white evangelicals but he has more room to grow here, especially if he gets the Bob Vander Plaats endorsement.  Anyway, it is increasingly looking like Iowa is Ted Cruz's to lose at this point.

Another reason to be happy with this poll is that he is now being viewed as the most electable candidate:

This is very important because he has a clear lead among those that want someone who is the most conservative (or most shares their values) but has always lagged in the electable category.  It's also important that he wins among those who say the most important characteristic is that the candidate be honest and trustworthy.  Rubio is behind Trump in these voters!

On the policy front, as usual Trump is leading in the economic category but his lead isn't as high as before.  I think though that Cruz needs to continue to talk about economic issues to win more of these voters.  He is doing great with those who most care about terrorism but the ISIS hysteria will fade.

A good sign that this Cruz boom will be sustainable is that a little less than half of Cruz supporters have already made up their mind to vote for him. 

Note that only 22% of Rubio support is actually firm.  I think a lot of people like Rubio because he is generally likeable, looks good on TV and talks well.  But not that many people outside of the Weekly Standard actually LOVE him. This could mean that as other establishment candidates, like Chris Christie, have little boomlets, his supporters might switch quickly. 

Also, Ted Cruz seems to be the least hated candidate out there with the fewest percentage of people saying they would never vote for him. That is pretty amazing as the conventional wisdom is that he is a divisive figure.  Cruz seems to have a high ceiling of support.

Going hand in hand with that is the fact that his favorables are pretty much as high as you can get them among Iowa voters, pretty much across the board (except for moderate/liberal voters):

And if there was any statistic to make you believe that Cruz will end up crushing Trump in Iowa, here it is: 

The vast majority of respondents believe that Ted Cruz cares about their problems while only 58% of them think Trump does.  People tend to vote for people who care.  It's really reassuring to see Ted Cruz's numbers this high.  He used to have this used car salesman thing about him but he has been able to really humanize the way he talks so that people see that he really does care about them.


Monday, November 23, 2015

Which candidates get the grassroots support

It's amazing how little of the moderates' money comes from donations <$200.  Seems like a sign that the normal average grassroots Republican voter hates them:

Sunday, November 22, 2015

Cruz is Surging in Iowa and is now #2

Another great poll for Ted Cruz:

And importantly, Cruz is leading by quite a lot in one metric which makes me think he is in a great position to win:


Saturday, November 21, 2015

Watch the Iowa Presidential Forum

I really do like this format, I feel you get to know the candidates so much better.  I still don't understand why Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman didn't show up last time around:

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Ted Cruz on the Glenn Beck Show

I love it how he said Obama uses the language of ISIS by saying Christians have sinned too and then bringing up the Crusades from several hundred years ago.

Fox NH Poll: Without Trump, Cruz would be tied for the lead, statistically

Here is another reason to hope Trump crashes and burns soon (or at least after Iowa).  Without Trump in the race, Ted Cruz is in a statistical dead heat for the lead in the all important New Hampshire primary.:

PPP Poll: Cruz is almost as electable as Rubio

If you look at the head to head data, they really are pretty close, with Cruz even winning independents by a similar amount as Rubio  As I've said, I think some temperament/style changes can go a long way into changing the perception that Rubio is the most electable:

Ted Cruz vs. Marco Rubio

The latest Bloomberg poll asked voters to compare Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio in a number of ways.  It really gives a sense of what Ted Cruz needs to do to become the nominee:

I think the temperament and "cares about people like you" questions are the most critical and really only require a change of style rather than substance.  I think when Ted Cruz was talking about the economic impact of illegal immigration that was a step in the right direction, he needs to be doing much more of that and probably less of the "let Obama say that to my face" stuff.

Ted Cruz #3 in Latest PPP National Poll

Cruz seems to be having a nice post-debate surge.  He is now #3 in the latest PPP national poll.  And even long-time political analysts like Larry Sabato now consider him the second most plausible nominee (Marco Rubio is #1).  I hope he can continue this momentum and win Iowa because that really will be critical.  Anyway, here is some of the interesting data from the PPP poll:

As you can see, Ted Cruz is doing amazingly well with the "very conservative" getting almost a third of those.  The issue though is he only gets 1% of moderate voters, which is the same level as Jim Gilmore and Bobby Jindal and is less than what Huckabee is getting.  That is a problem both in the blue states withing the GOP nomination process and the general election.  Things are so bad that he seems to be hated by the moderates:

And finally, in a head to head race vs Rubio, he loses, mainly because he is viewed as less electable than Rubio.  I think if he can moderate his image (not his message), he can close that gap and just clean up as he has a huge lead among those who want someone who is conservative:

Watch this 40 minute interview of Ted Cruz with Steven Crowder

How can I not like a guy who is a Pink Floyd fan?:

Ted Cruz comments on the Mark Levin Show

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Ted Cruz's powerful remarks on Palestinian and Iranian terrorism

The man is good:

Ted Cruz Says a Prayer for France

Jindal Dropping Out Should Benefit Ted Cruz

I know most people think Bobby Jindal was an afterthought in this race but he was polling between 4-6% in the last couple of polls in Iowa, not an inconsequential amount of support.  The question is, where are they likely to go?  Based on this crosstab from PPP, Cruz is set to be one of the main beneficiaries (behind Carson who seems to have peaked according to the latest two NH polls):

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

The failure of Obama/Clinton/Kerry foreign policy in one chart

I think Ted Cruz should bring this to his debate with Hillary.  What a disaster:

(h/t ZeroHedge)

Ted Cruz defends his Syrian refugee stance on CNN

Watch Ted Cruz defend his plan to provide preferential treatment for Christian Syrian refugees.  My view is that there would have been nothing shameful to give preferential treatment to Jewish refugees during World War II.  Also, how exactly are we supposed to vet muslim refugees that are potentially members of ISIS?  Look at their school records in Syria?  I know that the vast majority of the refugees are just innocent victims but it doesn't take many to commit a terrorist attack like we saw in Paris.  Someone should be thinking about the future victims of terrorism.  Anyway, here is Ted Cruz:

Monday, November 16, 2015

Ted Cruz at the Rally for Religious Liberty in Iowa

Ted Cruz discusses Islamic Terror with Hugh Hewitt

New Ted Cruz Ads in Iowa

Video of Ted Cruz at Faith Assembly of God Rally

Ted Cruz was really on fire here.  He went after Rubio again without mentioning his name saying he won't be a candidate who says one thing in English and another in Spanish.  Ouch:

Steve King (R-IA) endorses Ted Cruz in Iowa!

This was a great get for Ted Cruz and will help him win the state.  Now keep your fingers crossed for the Bob Vander Plaats endorsement.  Anyway, here is the Steve King endorsement video:

Cruz is now polling as #2 in NH!

From the latest poll by Gravis, it looks like Ted Cruz has moved to #2 in NH thanks to Carson completely cratering (we'll have to see if this is confirmed in another poll before getting too confident).  I think if Trump blows up and Cruz wins Iowa, he may have a chance at NH..

Further evidence Cruz is not pro-Amnesty

The Cruz amendment to the Gang of 8 bill, which the Rubio folks have been pointing to as proof of his support for amnesty, was meant as a poison pill to kill the legislation.  Otherwise would Jeff Sessions, one of the most anti-amnesty Senators out there have voted for it?  Here is Bloomberg with all the details:

But others who were monitoring the bill's progress at the time believe the senator was employing parliamentary jujitsu, adding a provision that would undermine support for the bill. The key evidence for that: Though Cruz's amendment failed, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions and Utah Senator Mike Lee, two fierce Republican opponents of legalizing undocumented people, voted for it. Democrats, who controlled the Senate, had made a path to citizenship a non-negotiable component of reform.

In painting Cruz as a supporter of legal status for undocumented immigrants, "the Rubio campaign is spinning," said Mark Krikorian, an immigration activist who was working to scuttle the 2013 bill. "My sense is Cruz's amendment was clearly intended as a poison pill for the Democrats. It was a legislative tactic... You often introduce measures you hope will be poison pills if you're trying to kill a piece of legislation. Now, it didn't work in the end but it was a perfectly plausible attempt. I might've voted for it myself it I was in the Senate, to try and kill the bill."

Stephen Miller, a spokesman for Sessions, noted in an e-mail that "numerous conservatives offered amendments to the progressive Gang of Eight bill that were designed to improve enforcement or combat amnesty." He continued, "That does not mean these Senators supported the bill with those changes. That would be an extremely untenable interpretation."

Friday, November 13, 2015

Rich Lowry: Cruz has a better chance than people think

Rich Lowry has a great piece on how the establishment/media is underestimating Cruz, not really thinking he has a chance for the nomination.  But guess what:

  • The indications of the strength of Cruz’s operation and the shrewdness of his positioning are mounting.
  • He had more cash on hand at the end of the third quarter than any other Republican.
  • He has major super PAC backing.
  • He assessed the anti-establishment mood in the party more accurately than any of the other traditional Republican candidates.
  • He reacted to the rise of Trump very deftly for his purposes.
  • He has seen a couple of key potential competitors, Scott Walker and Rand Paul, either hit a wall or badly underperform.
  • He has a discernible ideological and geographic base.
  • He has, relatedly, a path to the nomination that is simple and intuitive (win Iowa, consolidate the right and beat an establishment that might be too fractured and unpopular to prevail this time).
  • He lights up pretty much every conservative audience he addresses.
  • He is an excellent debater, and he simply doesn’t make tactical or rhetorical mistakes.
And yet, while many of these qualities are duly noted, he doesn’t really get his due.

Listen to Ted Cruz on the Mike Gallagher Show

Cruz says that Rubio saying that he basically has the same views on immigration as Rubio is the same as if the Ayatollah said that Cruz had basically the same views as the Ayatollah on Iran:

Watch Ted Cruz at the Florida Sunshine Summit

He really knows how to work the crowd:

Don't believe those claiming Cruz isn't that different than Rubio

There has been a bit of a rush by many folks to claim that Cruz isn't that far from Rubio on immigration.  They point to an amendment that he attempted get added to the Gang of 8 bill, which seems to insinuate that he was generally in favor of passing the bill.  Well, Right Scoop has the complete story and makes it pretty clear that Cruz was sponsoring amendments in order to expose the Gang of 8 bill for what it was, a sham.  While Rubio promised that border security was going to be an intregral part of the bill, what we got was a bill that started with legalization, followed by a commission to discuss border security and ending with a path to citizenship.  Cruz, on the other hand, told the truth about the bill:

Anyway, these attacks on Cruz are a great example of why it is typically difficult for a Senator to be elected President.  The Senate requires political maneuvering and that can always be twisted into something it is not.  For example, imagine if there were a Republican bill for privatizing social security and a Democratic bill.  If a Republican Senator votes against the Democratic bill because he prefers the Republican bill, his political opponents at some point will start the meme that somehow he is against privatizing social security, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Anyway, Cruz will survive this because his conservatism is just not in question and time and time again he has done what he has said he was going to do.  Rubio, on the other hand, lied, schemed and obfuscated during his attempt to get the Gang of 8 bill passed.

Thursday, November 12, 2015

I forgot how bad the Gang of 8 bill was

I think is going to be a real albatross around the neck of Rubio.  This crap really makes him sound like a complete fake, breaking promises for the sake of expediency.  Byron York does a great job laying out, in detail, all of the issues.  Here are a few, but read the whole thing:

"Let's be clear," Rubio said. "Nobody is talking about preventing the legalization. The legalization is going to happen. That means the following will happen: First comes the legalization. Then come the measures to secure the border. And then comes the process of permanent residence."

Later in the interview, Rubio stressed that he would not insist on security measures as a condition for legalizing currently illegal immigrants. "As for the legalization, the enormous majority of my colleagues have accepted that it has to happen and that it has to begin at the same time we begin the measures for [the border]," Rubio said. "It is not conditional. The legalization is not conditional."


Rubio gave the Secretary of Homeland Security broad authority to issue waivers to criminal immigrants. "The secretary may waive [the misdemeanor and other requirements] on behalf of an alien for humanitarian purposes, to ensure family unity, or if such a waiver is otherwise in the public interest," the bill said. That could mean almost anything


During the selling of the Gang of Eight, Rubio pushed back against skeptics who suggested the executive branch — whether the Obama administration or any other administration — would actually enact tough border security. Rubio's trump card was the bill's provision for something called the Southern Border Security Commission. Made up of border state governors plus representatives appointed by the president, the House and the Senate, the commission, according to Rubio, would take charge of border security if an administration failed to do so.

Rubio promised conservatives that the commission would have actual authority to enact security. The bill "requires if the Department of Homeland Security does not achieve 100 percent operational awareness and 90 percent apprehensions on the border, they lose control of the issue, to a commission, not a Washington commission, to a local commission, made up of the governors of the four border states ... where they will then finish the job of securing the border, including the fencing plan," Rubio told radio host Mark Levin in April 2013. Rubio told many other people the same thing.

It wasn't true. When the bill came out, it said the commission's "primary responsibility ... shall be making recommendations" to the president and Congress on "policies to achieve and maintain the border security goal." The bill said the commission would have six months to write a report with security recommendations; after giving its advice, it would be disbanded within 30 days.

The commission was, in other words, just another Washington commission. It had no actual power to do anything, regardless of what Rubio said.


Jeff Greenfield: Ted Cruz is playing chess, the others are playing checkers

Jeff Greenfield is really one of my favorite political commentators, despite his liberal leanings.  He is just a complete political junkie who has a great sense of history and so brings some wonderful perspective that is usually absent from other commentators.  Anyway, here is what he says about Ted Cruz:

“I understand that when the mainstream media covers immigration, it doesn’t often see it as an economic issue,” he began. “But, I can tell you for millions—of Americans at home watching this, it is a very personal economic issue. And, I will say the politics of it will be very, very different if a bunch of lawyers or bankers were crossing the Rio Grande. Or if a bunch of people with journalism degrees were coming over and driving down the wages in the press. Then, we would see stories about the economic calamity that is befalling our nation. And, I will say for those of us who believe people ought to come to this country legally, and we should enforce the law, we’re tired of being told it’s anti-immigrant. It’s offensive.”

“I am the son of an immigrant who came legally from Cuba … to seek the American dream. And, we can embrace legal immigration while believing in the rule of law … is not compassionate to say we're not going to enforce the laws. … And we’re going to drive down the wages for millions of hardworking men and women.”

In that single answer, Cruz managed to include the always-popular swipe at the media, slam the elites despised by left (bankers) and right (journalists), and link his hard-line stance on immigration not to a nativist impulse, but to a desire to protect the less skilled, less affluent workers whose wages are threatened by cheap labor. In a single answer, he struck populist, “Constitutionalist,” and compassionate notes, all premised on the belief—the make-or-break belief of his campaign—that the Republican base is now in substantial opposition to the Chamber of Commerce-Capitol Hill Republican Party that has chosen every nominee since Barry Goldwater half a century ago.

On a series of other questions, Cruz returned again and again to an assault on privileged economic elites—not the stuff of which usual Republican talking points are made. He argued that the defense budget increases could be paid for by cutting “corporate welfare, like sugar subsidies.” (Sugar subsidies, not so incidentally, are a particularly treasured herd of sacred cows in Florida, whence Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio happen to hail.) He broadened that theme when asked if he would bail out big banks in the event of a future financial crisis.


What Cruz is demonstrating, as Gingrich did, is the ability to weave any answer to any topic into a broader argument that resonates with the Tea Party and evangelical wings of the Republican Party, and that embodies the sense of resentment and disaffection that has propelled Donald Trump into a status almost no political observer imagined. It is of a piece with Cruz's fundamental campaign approach, which fuses highly specific, almost wonky-sounding policy points and broader populist themes that resonate with even the most policy-averse corners of the Republican electorate.

Dick Morris: Ted Cruz is doing a great job attracting Reagan Democrats

Check out Dick Morris talking about how Reagan Democrats will be the key to the election and Ted Cruz is doing the best job in attracting them.  He's not always the best analyst or prognosticator but this analysis rings true to me.  He says that union members don't like Wall Street and don't like how mass immigration is costing them jobs and lowering pay, hence immigration is more of an economic issue for them more than anything.  Which is completely true.  Especially for my middle-aged neighbor who was just replaced at work by cheap labor with an H1B.   Anyway, watch the video (h/t Reaganite Republican):

Ted Cruz on the Laura Ingraham Show Talking Marco Rubio and Immigration

Guess what? Mexico has a strict illegal immigration policy

People just love trying to paint anybody who is anti-illegal immigration as racist and anti-latino.  Well I guess then that Mexico is one giant anti-latino country.  This is an older article from Michelle Malkin but still true today:

  • The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?
  • If outsiders do not enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome. Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam, and prove they can provide their own health care.
  • Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal-alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).
  • Law-enforcement officials at all levels — by national mandate — must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal-alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration-enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens’ arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.
  • Ready to show your papers? Mexico’s National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens’ identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.

Ted Cruz Town Hall at the VFW

Ted Cruz talks the GOP debate on Hannity

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Jack Welch, legendary CEO of GE, Loves Ted Cruz

This video is from April but I just came across it.  Jack Welch, the legendary CEO of GE, talks about what he thinks about the candidates and he LOVES Ted Cruz.

Neil Cavuto Interview with Ted Cruz Post-Debate

Does Cruz have a chance to win Iowa? Hell yes!

Just felt like a little history lesson.  On November 11, 2011, the RCP average for Iowa had Herman Cain in the lead at 22.8%, Mitt Romney at 21.5% and the eventual winner, Rick Santorum at only 3.5% (this was right before the Newt boomlet which took him to 31% in the Iowa polls).  Note than Santorum actually never led in the polls (in fact he was usually #3) and was underestimated by a full 8% but won because of a superior organization, which everyone says Cruz has this time around.  Cruz is also at 12.3% over 3x higher than Santorum was at this point.  Here is the chart from 2012:

Thoughts on the Fox Business GOP Debate (hint: Cruz won)

I just finished watching the whole thing and I think objectively Ted Cruz is the winner (though I won't blame you for not believing me as I run a Jews for Ted Cruz blog).  So was Fox Business, which ran a much more respectful debate than CNBC (I liked Neil Cavuto's dig at CNBC at the end).  Anyway, here are my candidate by candidate thoughts:

Ted Cruz - As I mentioned, he was the winner.  He clearly had a good handle on all the issues and is a principled conservative.  I like that he took over the gold issue which should take some votes from Rand Paul (Ted Cruz is basically running as a non-kooky Rand Paul who doesn't have extreme views on foreign policy).  He also was able to hit Marco Rubio on sugar subsidies without actually mentioning his name.  And finally, by mentioning JFK as being a President from the past that has had great economic policies, he makes himself look less like an extremist and should help start the flow of moderates and independents to him (though obviously he has a lot more work to do).  When was the last time the Democrats have mentioned a Republican President from the last 60 years that they have liked?

Marco Rubio - He was very knowledgeable on foreign policy and I liked his comment about us needing more welders than philosophers (though I think he should instead say we need more welders than burger flippers as the move from manufacturing to service jobs is what has destroyed the working class of this country). But I think Rand Paul and Ted Cruz were able to make Marco Rubio sound less conservative that I think he would like.  That said, he probably will be taking votes from Kasich and JEB after this debate so will probably have an increase in the polls.

Carly Fiorina - She really is an American version of Margaret Thatcher.  I just really wish she had some sort of ground game so other than getting periodic boosts from polls, I just don't think she will be able to go very far.  I have to say though she would make a wonderful Secretary of State!

Rand Paul - His best debate so far.  He was able to make substantive attacks on Rubio which made Rubio sound like just another politician who likes handouts.  Of course though, his night wasn't perfect as he confused Iraq with Syria repeatedly in an extended answer.  Maybe he will get a bump or maybe the gold bugs behind him will defect to Ted Cruz who has a better chance and doesn't sound as kooky.

JEB -  Much better delivery than normal.  He sounded experienced and reasonable. He pretty much screwed himself though by not shaking Marco Rubio's hand during the break as that is really the only thing people are talking about in relation to his performance.  I do want him to drop out but I like him in the race as he is splitting the moderate/establishment vote.  If we have more moderates than conservatives running, it increases the chance that a real conservative will win the nomination.  That is probably the only way Reagan was able to triumph in 1980. 

Donald Trump - His schtick is getting a little long in the tooth and he looked like an idiot in talking about TPP and China for so long only to get corrected by Rand Paul that China isn't a party to that treaty.  But I did like that he said that any of the candidates' tax plans would be better than what he has now as he finally sounded like more of a team player and less of a narcissist.

Ben Carson - Started out really strong with his comments on his past and the minimum wage.  Really good stuff that would have broad appeal.  But then I started to lose the ability to follow his responses.  He's a smarter Herman Cain but still is a Herman Cain.

John Kasich - As someone else mentioned, he is Jon Huntsman with a social disorder.  His angry interruptions were just too much.  Also, his attempt to sound reasonable and practical in his policy proposals was torpedoed by his talk about picking which depositors get their money back from a bank failure (first, we have FDIC insuring deposits so I dont even know the point of his argument and then to say that the government should decide which individual depositors should be bailed out was nonsensical and asking for trouble).

Megyn Kelly Interview of Ted Cruz Post-Debate

He really is an A+ candidate:

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

This is how you take down Marco Rubio

Instead of attacking Marco Rubio from the left, which seems to be JEB's strategy, Ted Cruz (or more specifically his SuperPAC) is attacking him for really not doing much except for trying to get amnesty through Congress.  Then the ad highlights all the shenanigans that Ted Cruz helped to stop.

Andrew McCarthy: Ted Cruz is right on the Muslim Brotherhood

I've always really liked Andrew McCarthy, he has been at the forefront of the battle against radical Islam for years.  So it means a lot when he heartily endorses Cruz's efforts to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization:

This week, finally, Ted Cruz decided enough is enough. The Texas senator and Republican presidential hopeful has proposed a bill to force the designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as what it actually is: a terrorist organization.

The legislation, Senator Cruz tells me, “is part of a larger effort to expose the various radical elements that are trying, both at home and abroad, to undermine our very way of life.”


Cruz could not be more right in describing the Brotherhood as “the key foundation stone for radical Sunni terrorism that has spawned both al-Qaeda and ISIS.” In fact, as the bill describes, there is a significant history of Brotherhood underwriting of terrorism. In addition, key al-Qaeda figures have been launched by immersion in Brotherhood ideology.

It should come as no surprise, then, that where the Brotherhood is active, ISIS and al-Qaeda thrive.

Ted Cruz understands the threat and is distinguishing himself by charting a very different policy direction. It will serve him well. And it would serve the country well. 

It really is ridiculous that we don't already designate the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that is hoping to destroy our entire way of life, as a terrorist organization considering we consider the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which is our effective ally against ISIS, to be one.  It's just so messed up.

PPP Poll: Cruz #3 in South Carolina

In the latest PPP poll of South Carolina voters, 15% of respondents say they will vote for him, more than double his 6% outing in the last poll that organization conducted in early September, which is great news.  With Trump at 25% (down from 37% in the last PPP poll) and Carson at 21% (flat with the last poll), Cruz is getting really close to the lead.  In fact, he is leading among those who want to vote for the candidate who is the most conservative with 28% of that group.  However, he is #5 among those who want to vote for the most electable candidate with 8%.  He really needs to work on his electability image in order to win this thing.  I think if he can sound reasonable in debates and then wins Iowa, that will really help (winning Iowa will by definition prove he is a winner).

New York Times goes after Cruz's dad. I don't remember them making a big deal about Obama's dad who was a bigamist, a drunk and a wife-beater

The New York Times has a hit piece aimed at Ted Cruz's dad that basically says that maybe his dad wasn't as big of an anti-Batista rebel as he says he was.  Really?  I just don't get how this has anything to do with anything.  They don't argue that he was anti-Batista, but the degree he was anti-Batista (was he blowing up buildings or just spray painting?).  I don't remember them going after Obama's father who had multiple wives, was a drunk and a wife-beater.  To me that is much more serious than if someone embellished stories from 60 years ago.  Regardless, there is almost no way to prove this through eye witness accounts as the Times tries to do.  If you ask people who knew me my senior year in high school, which wasn't 60 years ago, they would say I was a nice kid who never got into trouble and wouldn't remember me getting 2 weeks worth of detention.

I guess though that it's a good sign if this is the best they can come up with for Ted Cruz.

Monday, November 9, 2015

I guess you are an opportunist for telling the truth

I have to admit, I do admire Karl Rove.  He's a really smart guy who does a great job using numbers to make arguments, which is huge upgrade to most talking heads who just do a lot of hand waving.  The problem is he is just too married to the Bush clan.  In a semi-hit piece in the Washington Post "A lot of people just don't like Ted Cruz, how come that is okay with him?" he is quoted as criticizing Cruz for turning against Bush political appointees, both of which turned out to be disasters for the cause of individual liberty:

Karl Rove, a former senior adviser to Bush, sees Cruz as someone who conveniently takes aim at former allies “for political purposes.”

Rove said on Fox News recently that Bush soured on Cruz even though the younger Texan got his start on Bush’s 2000 campaign. It happened in part because Cruz faulted Bush for appointing Roberts to the top spot on the Supreme Court — and criticized his father, George H.W. Bush, for appointing since-retired justice David Souter.

The ex-president “thought it was a little opportunistic,” Rove said.
It's opportunistic to say the truth?  To say that John Roberts and especially David Souter were pretty much horrible Supreme Court picks?  Is that even up for debate anymore unless your bread is buttered by the Bush family (well, buttered by their servants, they probably don't tend to butter much themselves). 

Anyway, I expect more criticisms to start coming out against Ted Cruz (especially from the Trump and Rubio folks) in the next several weeks as he has climbed in the polls and is gaining momentum in Iowa.  Unlike Rubio however, he seems like he is probably pretty clean (as clean as a politician can be I guess).  Some people are really dumpster diving to pin anything on him including saying that his education savings account initiative is a plot to give money to Goldman Sachs.  I guess we shouldn't have any education or health savings accounts at all because the money might actually have to be kept in a bank.

Sunday, November 8, 2015

NPR actually writes a very positive piece on Ted Cruz

You never really expect anything from National Palestinian Radio to be positive for someone like Ted Cruz, so it was a nice surprise to read this:

Cruz's strategy for winning the Republican nomination is sophisticated in its patience and cunning.

Like a football coach intimately familiar with his team's strengths and the other teams' weaknesses, Cruz has been spending his time and money building campaign infrastructure throughout the South and Midwest. That's playing to your strength. Publicly, he stays on message and doesn't attack other Republican candidates. And don't panic, don't always be reacting to what the other guys (and gal) are doing.

Did a New York billionaire unexpectedly jump into the lead? Let the political pundits sneer and joke about the supposedly hapless Cruz picking up Donald Trump's crumbs. The young senator has never felt any threat from the bombastic developer and being friendly to the new guy is smart politics.

Has the quiet doctor suddenly caught the conservative fancy? Not a problem, Cruz defends him from the liberal sharks that are closing in to tear the good doctor apart. You won't hear the Texas senator say a word about grain-filled Egyptian pyramids, scholarship offers from West Point or knife-points and friend's belt buckles, why should he? He's amused that this go-round, it's the Republican moderates at each other's throats, Jeb and Marco can have at it, let The Donald referee.

Meanwhile, Cruz has quietly amassed a campaign war chest that's second to none. Three separate Cruz superPACS with tens of millions more waiting in reserve to attack when the time comes, and it's not just Texas billionaires like technology mogul Darwin Deason, although he has them, too. Cruz takes in millions from a grass roots network of Tea Party and other insurgent Republicans in small amounts. Not unlike another freshman Senator who ran and won on a wave of Internet-driven contributions.


On Friday night, after his speech to the National Religious Liberties Conference in Des Moines, I was surprised to see Cruz and his staff boarding the same small regional jet back to Dallas as me. Didn't he have a private plane, I thought the Koch brothers took care of this stuff? I'd planned to write about our interview and the day on the flight back, but as we took our seats, I was dumbfounded to see Cruz and I were seated across the aisle from one another in coach.

Ted Cruz for President

On my main blog I just wrote a piece endorsing Ted Cruz for President.  There just is no other Presidential candidate that comes closer to my views than he does.  He is relatively libertarian in that he is for small government and even endorses the gold standard while on foreign policy he doesn't have a knee jerk isolationism like Ron/Rand Paul.

Honestly, after writing my endorsement, I just don't know why I didn't just go with him before.  He's everything I've always wanted in a conservative candidate, he is smart, articulate, passionate and actually believes in something and that something is freedom. He is also exactly what we need in the White House.  Our nation's finances are abysmal, this country is crumbling around us and we need someone who is willing to do something drastic to save it.  Ted Cruz is one of the few willing to, as JFK said "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." He is also extremely pro-Israel, which is one of the reasons I decided to start this blog (can you imagine if Bibi has a partner at the head of the US like Ted Cruz??? ).  Caroline Glick is my go-to columnist on all issues related to Israel.  Her analysis is second to none and so are her principles.  Here is what she wrote on Facebook back in 2014:

G-d bless Sen. Cruz. He is a rare and extraordinary leader and he should go from strength to strength.

And then just a few weeks ago she wrote:

Since arriving in Washington four years ago, Cruz has arguably been Israel’s most avid defender in the Senate. During Operation Protective Edge in July 2014, Cruz used his authority as a member of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee to force the Obama administration to end the Federal Aviation Commission’s ban on US flights to Ben-Gurion Airport. Cruz announced at the time that he would put a hold on all State Department appointments until the administration justified the flight ban.

Rather than defend its position, the administration restored flights to Israel after 36 hours.
So G-d bless Ted Cruz, may he save the United States and Israel from destruction.

I hope that other members of my tribe find this blog and learn that Ted Cruz is the person that we need in the White House.