The Clown Show Starts With the Biggest Clown- Cruz is In -Fun Begins

[superbeets]

Trump also vowed to team up with Russia to to wipe out the jihadists, it was reported by The Hill.
'We can use them to knock out ISIS with us so that maybe we don’t always have to pay for it,' the billionaire added.
Earlier, Trump wasted no time getting to work in New Hampshire on Tuesday afternoon, meeting with the media shortly after his plane landed from Iowa.
Trump, who appeared tired and surprisingly low energy, said he was still feeling positive about his campaign after a second place finish in the first primary of election season.


He also had nothing but nice things to say about Marco Rubio, fondly speaking of the third-place finished in Iowa in much the same way he used to talk about Cruz as he called him a 'good guy.'

 

[superbeets]

As for why he did not pull off the victory in the end, Trump admitted that could have been because of his decision to skip the debate.


'I think some people were disappointed that I didn't go into the debate,' said Trump, who then added he would skip the event all over again and was much happier with having raised $6million for veteran charities.


'I think we did very well,' Trump latter added of his Iowa showing.
'I guess what did happen is one poll came out that said we were four or five points ahead and maybe built up a false expectation for some people.'
And he also saved a bit of vitriol for the media, who he once again said treated him unfairly after his showing in Iowa.
'People didn't talk about my second place,' said Trump.
'They didn't talk about it as positively as they should have.'


Asked before a rally in Milford, New Hampshire on Tuesday evening if he planned to change his campaign strategy, Trump told a news conference he felt confident in his methods, but he was adding more town hall-style events.


But any humility was fleeting as Trump went on to say he beat Rubio by getting support from almost 3,000 Iowans - 'That's a lot of people' - and that he had gotten a larger percentage of support than any other Republican candidate in history "except for that one number," he added, referring to Cruz's win.
He also said he had not tried very hard to win Iowa.
'I didn't devote tremendous time to it,' he said.
'I didn't expect to do so well.'

 

[ScottL]

Half border collie and half???

 

[vidswaps]

The RepubliCUNTS clown show continues.face)(*^%

Is this clown for real???
He does NOT know how DOWN & DIRTY the election process can be ???

He is making a mockery of the process,and the RepubliCUNTS party.

Go Trump, Go.!!!!!@)@)@)

 

[superbeets]

Half border collie and half???

 

[ScottL]

The dog in post #363 is a lot brighter than the dog in post #364

 

[SheriffJoe]

The dog in post #363 is a lot brighter than the dog in post #364

Both dogs are brighter than today's politicians.

 

[ScottL]

Both dogs are brighter than today's politicians.

Read the post #s and look again

 

[The Guesser]

Low Life Slime Ted Cruz is as Dishonest as it gets. No Wonder he's the Choice of the slime down here:

EXCLUSIVE–Voicemails: ‘Ben Carson Suspending Campaigning’; Cruz: ‘Accurate Report’

Chris Carlson / Associated Press

by ALEX SWOYER4 Feb 201616,663
New audio obtained exclusively by Breitbart News indicates that as the Iowa caucuses began on Monday night, the Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

97​

campaign called precinct captains informing them that Dr. Ben Carson was suspending campaigning, and instructing them to tell voters they should “not waste a vote on Ben Carson and vote for Ted Cruz.”

The calls were placed after the Carson campaign had already clarified that Carson was not suspending his campaign.
Nancy Bliesman, a precinct captain for Cruz in Crawford County, Iowa, told Breitbart News that she received two voice mails–one at 7:07 p.m. Central Standard Time (CST), and one at 7:29 p.m.–on the night of the Iowa caucuses, which began at 7:00 p.m.
The first call came from a woman with a phone number out of Galveston, Texas at 7:07 p.m. (transcript follows audio):

[inaudible]…from the Ted Cruz campaign, calling to get to a precinct captain, and it has just been announced that Ben Carson is taking a leave of absence from the campaign trail, so it is very important that you tell any Ben Carson voters that for tonight, uh, that they not waste a vote on Ben Carson, and vote for Ted Cruz. He is taking a leave of absence from his campaign. All right? Thank you. Bye.
​

The second voicemail was left at 7:29 p.m. from an Iowa phone number that Breitbart News traced back to a Cruz campaign volunteer hotline.

Hello, this is the Cruz campaign with breaking news: Dr. Ben Carson will be [garbled] suspending campaigning following tonight’s caucuses. Please inform any Carson caucus goers of this news and urge them to caucus for Ted instead. Thank you. Good night.
​

“My precinct people voted” without hearing the rumor that Carson would be suspending his campaign, Bliesman told Breitbart News. “Ben Carson did get his votes in our precinct ’cause I didn’t take the calls.”
Bliesman’s husband, who was also with her on Monday night, told Breitbart News that they were at the precinct labeled “DC-A-B,” which stands for the areas of Dow City, Arion and Buck Grove.
According to Mr. Bliesman, the total vote count in the precinct was as follows:

Donald Trump = 33
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)

79%​

= 15Ben Carson = 12
Ted Cruz = 12
Carly Fiorina = 3
Jeb Bush = 2
John Kasich = 1
Chris Christie = 1
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)

94%​

= 0Ric Santorum = 0
Mike Huckabee = 0
​

Bliesman said there was a “huge turnout,” adding, “we had probably at least 100 percent increase from four years ago.”
“Everyone knows the mainstream media says things–whether it’s true or not, check it out,” she urged, saying she wishes the Carson campaign had been consulted before the report was spread.
The revelation about Cruz’s campaign calls and voicemails comes after an email surfaced from Cruz’s deputy Iowa campaign director Spence Rogers, sent at 6:56 p.m.–four minutes before caucuses began–suggesting that Carson would be “taking time off from the campaign trail after Iowa and making a big announcement next week.” The email told supporters: “Please inform any caucus goers of this news and urge them to caucus for Ted Cruz.”
Cruz apologized to Carson on Tuesday, saying his team should also have forwarded a subsequent after Carson clarified that he would not be suspending his campaign.
However, the Carson campaign had already clarified at 6:53 p.m. that he was not dropping out.
The original report by Chris Moody of CNN at 6:44 p.m. had reported explicitly that Carson was not suspending his campaign.
Carson–who accepted Cruz’s apology–held a press conference on Wednesday, saying that he believes the messages sent out by the Cruz campaign damaged his results in Iowa.
On Thursday, he sent a message attacking the Cruz campaign, saying that “no attempts were made to verify the truth” about his departure, and that “no actions have been taken to correct the problem.”
The Cruz campaign referenced a clarifying tweet by CNN’s Chris Moody that was published at 7:30 p.m.
Cruz campaign spokesperson Catherine Frazier told Breitbart News on Thursday (via email):

The senator has already apologized for not more quickly making that clarification, and there is no evidence that our sharing of this news story impacted Carson’s campaign – he well outperformed expectations. The voicemails are in line with the reports that were made at that time. Our campaign shared an accurate report that Carson was suspending campaigning after the caucuses – he went home and he went to D.C. – and these voicemails do not suggest that he would completely drop out of the race.
Lastly, it should surprise no one that Carson’s initial announcement he was taking time off the trail would be a news story. It is highly unusual for candidates to take time off the trail between the first voting states.
​

Carson modestly out-performed his public poll average in Iowa by 1.6%.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/04/ted-cruz-voicemails-ben-carson-exclusive-audio/

 

[SheriffJoe]

Everyone is underestimating Ted Cruz

Updated by Timothy B. Lee on February 8, 2016, 2:30 p.m. ET tim@vox.com
TWEET SHARE (12) +

Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images​

Ted Cruz won last week's Iowa caucuses, exceeding expectations and capturing an impressive 27 percent of the vote. Donald Trump took second place, while Marco Rubio took third.

What happened next? There was a massive wave of media coverage about how "Marco Rubio was the real winner in Iowa." By exceeding expectations, the argument goes, Rubio generated positive buzz that will help him raise money, recruit volunteers, and win later primary contests. That, in turn, could consolidate his status as the choice of the party's mainstream.

The betting markets mirror this conventional wisdom. Before Iowa, markets thought Trump was most likely to win, followed by Rubio and then Cruz. After Cruz won Iowa,Rubio's odds on one market surged from 34 percent to 61 percent. But Cruz remained mired in third place — with the same market giving him a 12 percent chance of capturing the nomination.

Then in Saturday's Republican debates, Rubio had his "glitch," repeating the exact same two sentences three times in five minutes. Rubio's odds fell from 60 percent to 44 percent, while

Trump's rose from 22 to 32 percent. But Cruz's odds remained stuck at 12 percent.

This is ridiculous. Getting third place in Iowa is pretty good, but getting first place is better. And there's no good reason to simply assume Cruz is going to be a one-state wonder. Cruz is in a dead heat with Rubio in national polls taken since Iowa. And he'sonly about 2 percentage points behind Rubio in New Hampshire polls, a state whose Republican voters are known for supporting more centrist candidates.

Of course, nothing is certain in a race as chaotic as this one. But elite pessimism about Cruz says more about the biases of media and Beltway insiders than it does about the Republican primary itself.

Elites hate Ted Cruz. Republican voters aren't going to care.

Ted Cruz gets underestimated because elites — both Washington insiders and pundits — can't stand him.

Republican power brokers dislike him because he hasn't been a team player during his time in the Senate. He has spent the past four years portraying his fellow Senate Republicans as mendacious sellouts, which might be why not a single senator has endorsed him. (Marco Rubio has seven Senate endorsements; Jeb Bush has five, according to FiveThirtyEight's tracker.)

FOR MANY REPUBLICAN VOTERS, BEING HATED BY MEDIA ELITES AND BELTWAY INSIDERS IS AN ARGUMENT FOR CRUZ, as a result, many commentators — particularly believers in the "party decides" theory of presidential nominations — have long assumed that because Cruz is so despised by elites, he can't win. In contrast, Rubio is a much more palatable choice to party elites.

But for many Republican voters, being hated by media elites and Beltway insiders is an argument for Cruz. During the debates, Cruz has taken every opportunity to denounce the media — and every time he did it, the audience applauded. And political consultant Steve Schmidt told my colleague Andrew Prokop last fall that more than half of GOP voters felt "complete and utter and absolute contempt for the party establishment."

Perhaps the party will somehow corral its voters back into line. But in a year when so many Republican voters are disgusted with their party's leaders, the fact that those leaders love Rubio and despise Cruz seems like a reason to be bullish on Cruz.

Ted Cruz isn't another Rick Santorum

The strongest case for skepticism about Ted Cruz is that Iowa has a record of picking evangelical-friendly candidates who go on to lose the nomination. In 2008, that was Mike Huckabee, who went on to lose New Hampshire and the nomination to John McCain. In 2012, it was Rick Santorum, who went on to lose New Hampshire and the election to Mitt Romney.

According to entrance polls, 64 percent of Iowa Republican primary voters described themselves as evangelical Christians, and Cruz won 34 percent of this group. Among the remaining 36 percent of Iowa Republican voters, Trump and Rubio both beat Cruz, with 29 and 26 percent of the vote, respectively, to Cruz's 18 percent.

Of course, evangelicals are a lot less common in New Hampshire than in Iowa, so it's not a surprise that Cruz is doing worse there. But Cruz has two advantages that should allow him to do significantly better in later states than Santorum and Huckabee did.

EVANGELICALS ARE A LOT LESS COMMON IN NEW HAMPSHIRE THAN IN IOWA, SO IT'S NOT A SURPRISE THAT CRUZ IS DOING WORSE THERE.

While Cruz has worked hard to win evangelical votes, his campaign — and his political persona more broadly — has been much less focused on social issues than the Huckabee and Santorum campaigns were. Not only did Huckabee and Santorum both focus heavily on same-sex marriage and abortion, they also eschewed some aspects of conservative orthodoxy on economic issues, campaigning instead as more populist "Sam's Club Republicans."

Huckabee "is not a conservative who is an evangelical, he's an evangelical populist," said David Keene, an influential conservative activist, in 2007. "It's not the evangelical part that conservatives worry about. It's the populism. It's his economic views."

Huckabee and Santorum weren't exactly left-wing on economic issues, but they were less enthusiastic about deregulation and tax cuts than most other Republicans. That made it harder for either to attract the support of wealthy businessmen or libertarian-minded voters, both important parts of the Republican coalition.

By contrast, Cruz has hewed closely to conservative orthodoxy on a wide range of issues. Prior to the 2016 campaign, he was best known for his opposition to illegal immigration and Obamacare, neither of which is a pet issue of evangelicals. That means Cruz has a better chance of appealing to the various factions that make up the Republican Party: social conservatives, free market and business groups, anti-immigration activists, foreign policy hawks, and so forth.

Ted Cruz has plenty of money

The other big difference between Cruz and previous Iowa winners is money.

In 2007, Mike Huckabee raised just $9 million, far behind John McCain with $37 million and Mitt Romney with $53 million. Rick Santorum was even weaker, raising only about $2.2 million in 2011 before losing to Mitt Romney, who raised $56 million. (Both Huckabee and Santorum raised more money after winning Iowa in 2008 and 2012, respectively, but that didn't leave them much time to build a nationwide campaign organization.)

By contrast, Cruz has been a star fundraiser. According to a New York Times tally, the Cruz campaign has raised $47 million, putting him second only to Ben Carson among Republicans (Jeb Bush raised a lot of money for his Super PAC before launching his campaign). And Cruz raised most of those funds in 2015, giving him time to build infrastructure across the country.

Donald Trump is vulnerable

Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesDonald Trump campaigning in New Hampshire. So far I've barely mentioned Donald Trump, who is currently leading in the polls both nationally and in New Hampshire. Trump's candidacy is so unusual that it would be foolish to confidently predict an outcome. But there are a couple of reasons to think Trump is vulnerable.

One is that Trump is far less organized than Cruz and other leading candidates. That helps to explain his underperformance in Iowa and suggests he will probably underperform the polls in future states as well.

Second, Trump may have a harder cap on his support than other candidates. Normally, primary voters fall in line behind a winner in the interest of party unity. But there's ample evidence that Trump wasn't a conservative until he started thinking about running for president in 2011.

So while Trump may be able to persuade 25 or 30 percent of the vote, that might still leave room for another candidate to rally a majority of the party against him. And as one of the best-funded and most consistently conservative candidates in the race, Cruz has as good a chance of becoming the Trump alternative as anyone.

 

[SheriffJoe]

I'm quite happy watching Cruz and Trump exchange wins until it's a two-man race and the establishment is forced to pick their poison.

After the last 7+ years, Americans deserve nothing less.

 

[Dave007inVegas]

I'm quite happy watching Cruz and Trump exchange wins until it's a two-man race and the establishment is forced to pick their poison.

After the last 7+ years, Americans deserve nothing less.

I don’t have a problem with either one. Slight lean to Trump.

 

[vitterd]

I don’t have a problem with either one. Slight lean to Trump.

That should tell everyone all they need to know.

Theu would ignore you like the rest of the world does.

 

[ScottL]

I probably prefer Trump over Cruz due to social policies. But I don't even care right now. Cruz is going to be too busy with our foreign policy mess and the economy to worry about gay marriage, medical marijuana, and Roe v Wade etc.

 

[ScottL]

• 
  [*=center]
  
  But I do love Cruz' foreign policy advisor tweeting this

​

Victoria Coates ‏@VictoriaCoates 8h8 hours ago

Victoria Coates Retweeted The Jerusalem Post
This looks pretty awesome.
Victoria Coates added,

The Jerusalem Post @Jerusalem_Post Israeli firm's new unmanned sea vehicle hits submarines with torpedoes http://dlvr.it/KS2ksG #IsraelNews

 

[neverbend]

For all of the Cruz supporters, may I suggest you don’t start sucking each others dicks just
yet.

Cruz is the hero of the litmus test crowd lead by Mark Levin who also championed Christine O'Donnell over Mike Castle
in Delaware & suppoorted Sharron Angle over Sue Loudon enabling Harry Read in Nevada & Coons in Delaware to win.
Sue Loudon was far ahead of Read in polling & Castle was 10 pts. ahead of Coons before O'Donnell won the primary
and got slaughtered by Coons. These litmus test candidates just make no sense it's so obvious.

Bookmaker noon today to win the election:
Clinton -125
Rubio +380
Trump +640
Sanders +765
Bush +2000
Cruz +2500

Cruz received absolutely no bounce from Iowa as neither did Former winners who
beat the eventual candidate in Iowa; Pat Robertson, Mike Huckabee & Rick Santorum.

Cruz is closer to me on issues than anyone but Trump but he just doesn't appeal
to me at all. The best post for him would be for Trump to select Cruz for the Supreme Court,
his conservative principles would be ideally suited for that post.

 

[SheriffJoe]

 

[SheriffJoe]

 

[SheriffJoe]

"90% of what the federal government does is illegal pure crap!"
-- Sheriff Joe

 

[SheriffJoe]

• 
  [*=left]
  

​

• 
  [*=left]To shrink the size and power of the federal government, the Cruz Five for Freedom plan eliminates the IRS, the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Commerce, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. As President, Ted Cruz will appoint heads of each of those agencies whose sole charge will be to wind them down and determine whether any programs need to be preserved. :aktion033

​

• 
  [*=left]Ted Cruz will empower the people by reducing the alphabet soup of Agencies, Bureaus, Commissions, and other programs that prop up special interests, at the taxpayer’s expense. The Cruz Five for Freedom Spending Plan identifies an initial 25 programs.

​

• 
  [*=left]The Cruz plan re-institutes President Reagan’s Grace Commission to assess federal spending levels and evaluate areas of waste and fraud. Ted Cruz would appoint private-sector leaders to serve on a commission that, as President Reagan put it, would “work like blood hounds” to improve government efficiency. The original Grace Commission report recommended 2,478 “cost-cutting, revenue-enhancing” suggestions, without raising taxes, weakening defense, or harming social welfare.

​

• 
  [*=left]A President Cruz will hold Congress accountable by enacting a strong Balanced Budget Amendment and requiring that a majority of members approve any major, cost-inducing regulation. And he will reduce costs by instituting a hiring freeze and federal pay reforms.

cheersgif​