The "Cubans"

[sirs]

Let's pretend that Trump's sail loses its wind, and the GOP nomination to go against Clinton comes down to Rubio vs Cruz.  I don't say that because I don't like Trump, nor that he couldn't win against Clinton.  I'm predicating this conjecture on that fact that Trump really isn't a Conservative.  He's alot of things, and saying all the right things to win him the GOP nomination, but his track record is hardly one of conservative, minimalistic-government principles

So, putting aside their looks, or how they talk, since neither is an issue to their electability, the 2 of them bring to the table 2 forms of conservatism.  One that has the DC power structure scared snotless, the other a likely more electable candidate, still guranteeing a conservative Republican in the WH, come Nov

For those who think Cruz can't win, have another thing coming.  The reality is that Cruz can win, but if he wins DC lobbyists and politicians attacking him will be out of a job, which is why they hate even the thought of a Cruz Presidency.  The Washington elite have every incentive to stop Cruz because he would be just as transformational as Obama has been, though his path to victory may be harder than Rubio's.

For critics of Rubio, he is seen as not going far enough, to reign in DC's power grab.  So while reality is that Rubio may have an easier time winning, than Cruz, his critics do not believe he will go far enough and do as much to fix the problems in Washington.

Cruz and Rubio would both be conservative to varying degrees. What is at stake between the two is how easy their election would be vs how transformational their presidency would be. Rubio backers are looking at the path to the White House. Cruz backers are willing to take a gamble on the slog of a general election campaign so they can see Washington rent asunder

Either would be a stellar step in repairing the massive damage Obama's socialist-light policies have rendered upon this country

[Plane]

  Where I work Cruz is not well remembered.

    He cost us a couple of paychecks you know.

      What can he promise that would mollify our harsh memory?

[sirs]

That's the thing....he's not the modern incarnation of a Politician, who's campaign is to promise everything to everyone.  His stance on trying to keep Congress committed to financial responsibility with tax payers' money could be seen by some as costing a couple of paychecks.  For those not Government employees, and fed up with the status quo, those actions are an indication of just how committed he'd be at fixing the massive damage inflicted on the populace by this administration, if he were President

Again, it provides a likely comparison board between the 2.  One who scares the living snot out of the DC elite & lobbyists, the other likely more electable.......but lacking such a record of commitment

[Xavier_Onassis]

Trump is not a conservative.
A candidate's appearance is clearly a factor in his electability, and has been ever since the age of photography and TV.

Yeah, sure, if Cruz is elected the lobbyists who oppose him will be out of a job. Like all those who oppose Obama have been selling encyclopedias  and Amway due to unemployablity for the past seven years. There will be MORE of them.

But Cruz is a weasel and a smartass that does not believe his own bullshit and it is obvious from listening to him. He's not getting elected. People hate him now and the more they know him the more they will hate him.  He is hateful. And he has no real solutions to this countries plans. No one is passing any damned flat tax.  Not even the GOP would pass it.

Obama has done far more good than harm to the people of this country. All he has done to you is make you afraid that he is gonna take your damned guns.

Lobbyists are not afraid of anyone. They are lawyers: they will represent whomever hires them and say whatever they need to to do the job they are given.

Electing people because they scare others is a really, really STUPID criteria. Perhaps that is why it appeals to you so much. You think that politics is some form of Pro Wrestling spectator sport.

[sirs]

Trump is not a conservative.

Who claimed he was??

Yeah, sure, if Cruz is elected the lobbyists who oppose him will be out of a job. Like all those who oppose Obama have been selling encyclopedias  and Amway due to unemployablity for the past seven years. There will be MORE of them.

The "out of a job" is rhetorical.  But thanks for demonstrating how completely empty Obama's pledge was to purge DC from the influence of lobbyists.  Add that to the laundry list of "promises" he apparently never meant to keep

But Cruz is a weasel and a smartass that does not believe his own bullshit and it is obvious from listening to him.

And you know he doesn't believe his own ideolgy........how again??

He's not getting elected. People hate him now and the more they know him the more they will hate him. 

If "the people" you're referring to are Democrats, liberals, entrenched politicians, lobbyists, and union bosses......not a problem

And he has no real solutions to this countries plans. No one is passing any damned flat tax.  Not even the GOP would pass it.

Every one of his platforms he's campaigning on are real solutions to this country's abysmal economic, unemployment, and foreign status.   So, it would appear the only way to "test your hypothesis" is to elect him as President, and see which party passes his proposals, and which party pulls out every parlimentary trick and filibuster to prevent it from becoming law 

Obama has done far more good than harm to the people of this country. All he has done to you is make you afraid that he is gonna take your damned guns.

Guns are the least of the fears of what Obama is "gonna take away"

Lobbyists are not afraid of anyone. They are lawyers: they will represent whomever hires them and say whatever they need to to do the job they are given.

Lobbyists crave power, as do entrenched politicians.  They feed each other, and demand control.  That's why both Trump and Cruz scare the snot out of them.  They can't control either.  And the less control they have the less power and influence they have.  THAT's what they're afraid of

Electing people because they scare others is a really, really STUPID criteria.

That hilarious coming from the side that tries to scare the electorate about the evils of the NRA and the GOP.  So, I guess if the label fits, wear it proudly, I'd suggest

Perhaps that is why it appeals to you so much. You think that politics is some form of Pro Wrestling spectator sport.

Again, the irony

[Xavier_Onassis]

    Trump is not a conservative.


Who claimed he was??

===================================
Trump himself has stated that he is a conservative many times. In some ways, he is. he certainly is in favor of lower taxes for  people like himself, he seems to believe in trickle down economics. But he is uninterested in abortions or persecuting gays by denying them rights.

When Cruz started out his victory speech with "All Glory to God" that is a clear example of bullshit. Abolishing the Dept of Education is something else he would not even try to do, just as Reagan lied about abolishing it and then doing nothing. He could never get any flat tax through Congress, and he surely knows that as well.

Cruz will not be president of this country. Nixon hated most of the people, but they were unaware of this: it came out in his tapes.

[sirs]

What he says and what he does, are 2 different things.  Point being there's very few conservatives that claim "he's a conservative".  Which begs the question, why bring it up?  To argue yet another point, no one is making??

And giving glory to God is no BS what-so-ever to a devoted Christian.  Where's his pledge to "abolish the Dept of Education"?  Must have missed that.  If he's campaigning on a flat tax, you can bet that once elected, he'd absolutely propose it, and then its up to congress to vote on it.  How much you want to bet that the GOP would pass it, while the Dems would try to prevent it from even coming to a vote?  I'd wager ownership to my house

And funny you should bring up Nixon's tapes, as some source of hatred, as Clinton's e-mails sing a far longer tune of unethical, when not irresponsibly reckless, conduct

[Xavier_Onassis]

You have not heard Nixon's tapes, apparently.
Nor did I mention them.

Nixon hated the people of this country.

I brought up Trump not being a "conservative" because Trump has claimed to be one many times. In any discussion about Trump, I think that Trump himself carries more weight than your opinions about Trump.  I think that Trump thinks he is a conservative, he just defines it differently than you do. As for me, I think that conservatism is simply a bogus aura that greedy people like to use to make their greed and selfishness seem more acceptable. They don;t really want to "conserve" anything: they just want to resurrect the "good old days" that they remember quite imperfectly.

[sirs]

You have not heard Nixon's tapes, apparently.
Nor did I mention them.

Actually you did

Nixon hated the people of this country.

please provide a quote, in context, from the tapes, where he made clear how he "hated the people of this country".  Your say so has no credibility

I brought up Trump not being a "conservative" because Trump has claimed to be one many times.

Obama claims to support the Constitution. Doesn't stop him from defying it time after time. 

As has been made abdunantly clear, no one that's massively supporting Trump is claiming he's some full blown Reagan-like conservative.  So its irrelevent what he claims.  And this forum is all about opinions, so it carries just as much weight as yours, which includes any discussion about Trump.

So, we're both in agreement, he is no "conservative", regardless of how you think he's simply redefining the term.  He's a populist, primarily, regardless of what he might claim.  His record makes that painfully clear.  He's saying "conservatives things" now, because he's trying to get the support of the base of the GOP, and cinch the nomination.  Doesn't make him a conservative, any more than you claiming to be objective.  He's simply tapped into the anger that the country has towards politicians in general, the same way Sanders is tapping into the base of the Democrat party, who are so fed up with political machines, like Clinton

[Xavier_Onassis]

Bernie appeals to Democrats who want a more progressive society than that which Clinton has supported in the past. It is not the same as the split in the GOP, which involves racism, religious bigotry and the promotion of religion over science.

[sirs]

No...Sanders appeals to many Democrats who are fed up with politicians, precisely like Clinton.  Yea, some want more socialism, but I'd opine most just don't trust Clinton, as far as they could throw her.  It's identical to the appeal many Republicans have for Trump, who are fed up with Republican politicians in general, who say whatever they need to get elected, then throw their entire constituency under the bus, once they get there

[Plane]

   

...........................and the promotion of religion over science.

  Is the Democratic party committed to the promotion of science over religion?

[Xavier_Onassis]

I hardly think so. They have never claimed that.

The forced birther movement  is based on people of one religion imposing their standards on everyone else.
So is the movement to prevent the ACA from providing birth control because some clowns at the Hobby Lobby don't want their employees to practice birth control.

[Plane]

......................based on people of one religion imposing their standards on everyone else.
...............

  What would you call forcing participation in gay marriage on bakers and photographers and even pastors , who would rather not.

[sirs]

A Double Standard?.......dare I say, Hypocrisy?