Consider this about Cruz before you go and believe the media spin

[Sam1]

OS, they do have county map statistics, I'll send you a link this afternoon

[Guest Bassman17SC]

6.8 I am convinced you know I will not believe any media (and GOP, for that matter) spin on Senator Cruz.  I've been waiting on someone, anyone like him since Ronnie.  Thank you for posting.

[Oh Shoot]

OS, they do have county map statistics, I'll send you a link this afternoon

 

We know exactly how many voted, state by state and county by county. We don't have how many "might have voted", because it's an unquantifiable projection, unknowable. The only "might have voted" stat that's valid is the total number of registered voters, which never gets anywhere near 100% participation.

 

National election participation varies every year -- it hasn't hit 60% of eligible voters since 1968. 2012 was about 3% lower participation than 2008, but 2012 was also well over the average since 1968 also.

 

 

- OS

Edited November 4, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I guess that's accurate counting all registered voters? But regardless,  consider the larger stat -- something like 110 million who were eligible didn't vote.

 

The question though,  is whether it would have made any difference in the outcome if all of them were registered and also voted, seems likely to me that BHO would simply have won by a much larger margin.

 

- OS

Even though that is quite possible, I think it is also as likely pigs can fly. There is no answer to which side those extra

votes would go, either way. It is sad to see so many who choose not to vote for whatever reason.

 

Once again, we have completely trivialized elections for no apparent reason.

[mav]

The election could have easily gone to Romney if people just went out and voted for Romney.

 

FIFY.

 

Romney lost because he was Romney, nothing more.  If Republicans and Democrats (open primaries) keep nominating Democrat-lite candidates in the Republican presidential primaries, then the Republicans are going to loose.  McCain lost, Romney lost, and if someone like Christie gets it in 2016, he will lose as well.  I would have no trouble voting for someone like Cruz.  While he might lose in the general, I would feel much better voting for someone who more closely shares my values and beliefs.  I stopped voting for candidates that have been deemed by someone like Karl Rove as the candidate most likely to beat the other guy.

 

How many people on this forum voted for Corker in the primary?  I guarantee you it was most cause he got 85% of the vote, and then got 65% in the general.  How's that working out?  Me?  I didn't vote for him in the primary or general, so I feel comfortable saying, "Don't look at me.  I didn't vote for that p.o.s."

[Sam1]

FIFY.

 

Romney lost because he was Romney, nothing more. 

 

And there lies the problem, people refusing to look at generic values and are nitpicking on every little issue.

 

You don't have to vote with the masses, but at some level need to understand there is no possible way that we will get everything we want in a candidate and these elections are zero-sum; there's no eh maybe maybe not.  Don't quote me on this but I think it was Reagan that said if we agree on 7 out of 10 things, then we can agree - or something to the affect.

 

A perfect example of this is Ted Cruz and his stance on anti-gay marriage; he is open and firm about it.  Personally, I think that people should mind there own damn business and let everyone do their own thing.  Would I still vote for him?  Hell yes, I'll be the first one in line. We have to compromise from time to time to reach the desired outcome.

[Oh Shoot]

Romney lost because he was Romney, nothing more.  If Republicans and Democrats (open primaries) keep nominating Democrat-lite candidates in the Republican presidential primaries, ...

 

Agree with first sentence, but not second. I fully believe Mitt lost because he just didn't project likeability and trustworthiness, on a personal level. I didn't like him myself.

 

Remember, at least a third vote because of some small petty personal reason, not because of big issues like you know, like freedom vs stateism, personal responsibility vs wealth distribution, states rights, constitutional issues, etc.

 

I actually think BHO was weak enough that even old grandfatherly McCain might have beat him the second time. But not weasel mannered, shifty eyed Mitt. Plus of course he was richer than Midas, and flaunted it, and envy is a widespread trait in the species.

 

Seriously.

 

- OS

Edited November 5, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[kieefer]

Cruz on Leno;

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/passantino/ted-cruz-grilled-by-jay-leno-on-the-tonight-show

 

first clip finishes up where he left off above.

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2013/11/sen-ted-cruz-and-jay-leno-first-peek.html/?nclick_check=1

[machinist]

I just read that Cruz's wife is on the Council of Foriegn Relations and works for Goldman Sachs. I haven't had time to research this. If this is true, she's in tight with the banksters and one worlders that have brought this country to where it is, and so is Cruz. Don't believe what he says when he claims conservative views. I doubt he's any better than Lamar or Corker. Not worth my time.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I just read that Cruz's wife is on the Council of Foriegn Relations and works for Goldman Sachs. I haven't had time to research this. If this is true, she's in tight with the banksters and one worlders that have brought this country to where it is, and so is Cruz. Don't believe what he says when he claims conservative views. I doubt he's any better than Lamar or Corker. Not worth my time.

Guilt by association. Hang her! Being the manager for a regional office for Goldman Sachs is a leap to make to convict one,

don't you think? Being on the Council on Foreign Relations means exactly what? I guess we should go hang Ms. Jolie, next?

Do you usually convict on that little evidence, if it is evidence, at all?

[Guest ThePunisher]

I just read that Cruz's wife is on the Council of Foriegn Relations and works for Goldman Sachs. I haven't had time to research this. If this is true, she's in tight with the banksters and one worlders that have brought this country to where it is, and so is Cruz. Don't believe what he says when he claims conservative views. I doubt he's any better than Lamar or Corker. Not worth my time.

Want to connect the dots for the commies running the government, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Shumer, Biden, Kerry, Feinstein, Boxer, the Clinton's, Terry McCauliffe, George Soros, Rahm Emanuel, Van Jones, Saul Alinsky, Bill Ayers, Eric Holder. Where does the dots stop? Edited November 9, 2013 by ThePunisher

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'd say most of those are members of the American Communist Party, or whatever the name is, but they different

from traitors like Cruz. If you can't tell what someone is doing by their actions then it is all over. As far as that Lamar

or Corker comment, they were against his filibuster style speech, and they have a pedigree RINO voting record,

not unlike McCain or McConnell. Cruz, without looking it up, is more like 90-100% conservative, among the highest

rated senators, and he has just begun his term. I guess we'll just have to see what he does with the rest of his term,

while the ship is sinking.

[Guest kalashnirob]

Erik, that depends on who you believe. I really don't know, but this isn't about him running for Prez, but more of him being the

sparkplug of change within the Republican Party, or the changer for a new party.

 

As far as him being eligible or not, that's best left up to the courts and the Constitution, rather than speculation on my part.

All I can say is I would love to see a bunch of Cruz types gain control of the Congress and make hay out of liberal politics.

That's where people like that can shine.

He's EVERYBIT as eligible as Obama, but I'm sure they'd be more willing to Prove CRUZ ineligible than their messiah OBAMAO

[Oh Shoot]

Guys, forget the citizenship thang, Cruz hasn't got a chance in the world of being elected president. As much as folks on a predominately conservative website like to pipedream that the country is becoming conservative enough to elect him, or a Rand Paul, it just ain't so.

 

All the GOP presidents since WWII have been moderately right of center, and yes that includes the great ex flaming liberal Reagan. You'd have to look way back to Goldwater to find anyone in the ballpark of a Cruz.

 

Things will have to become quite dire in this country, The Big Pain for most everyone, before a true conservative would have a chance for the presidency. Matter of fact, I think things would have to go so south that elections might actually be suspended for some duration.

 

- OS

Edited November 11, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[Randall53]

All of our seemingly life term politicians on both sides do not want any changes in the way business is done in Washington. They all scratch each other's backs and rob us blind.....and they like it that way.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Looks like the country has gone to hell in a commie handbasket! After five years of this communist crap, I'm surprised that the people have not actually revolted against this commie administration. People seem to be in a zombie daze, oblivious to the sinking ship.

[Oh Shoot]

Looks like the country has gone to hell in a commie handbasket! After five years of this communist crap, I'm surprised that the people have not actually revolted against this commie administration. People seem to be in a zombie daze, oblivious to the sinking ship.

 

You have to take away TV, smartphones, gasoline, and oh yeah, food.  Probably wouldn't "revolt" even then, just rampage.

 

Pretty far cry from revolting over taxes on paper and tea, eh? We've come so far.

 

- OS

Edited November 11, 2013 by Oh Shoot