TexasCHLforum.com

mojo84 wrote: COMPRESSED FOR SPACE

In other words, you don't know.

You asked how do I know. There you go.
Net favorable among Republicans with an opinion: for Walker and Rubio are in the 70s. Cruz is 54%
http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-m ... aign=tiles" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Among both conservatives and moderates he has higher negatives than Walker.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:I don't want some foam at the mouth bible thumper trying to use the government to tell me what to do .........

IMO, this right here is the unstated excuse (reason?) that many voters are so "NO WAY" about voting republican. After watching that speech, Cruze try to conjure up votes from his base, there's little to dissuade people from holding on to that opinion.

Here's the rub. I'm Jewish. I'm also a Tea party supporter. It's impossible to miss the very Christian overtones at Tea Party meetings.
But, here's the thing that most surprised me.

I attended a TP meeting last year where the headline topic was Religion in Public Schools (paraphrasing). I walked in the door prepared to be thrown out for speaking against allowing private (or more organized) prayer in public school. I was certain that was going to be the pitch. I could not have been more wrong. The speaker (I apologize for not remembering her name) was a military member (helo pilot??) who had written a book advocating for people of faith to send their kids to private, charter or home school, because public schools were not the right place for kids to practice or learn religion. There was clear support for school vouchers (which I support wholeheartedly), but not one person in an audience of several hundred tried to advocate for prayer in public school. It was a very real reset for me.

Will POTUS Cruz be an advocate for prayer in public schools, or an advocate for school vouchers? I believe the latter, but would like to hear that from his own mouth.

There's a huge difference between "progressive social programs" and "social Liberties". Will POTUS Cruz use the Bully Pulpit to advocate for stronger control over social liberties (gay marriage, war on drugs, 2A, school choice, etc) or would he try to expand social liberties and reduce progressive social programs? Again, I'd like to hear the answer from him unequivocally.

As recent experience has shown me, it is very possible that even a very religious person/group can be trusted to wield the power of government without trying to impose their religious beliefs on the whole of the country. Being guided by your Faith is not the same as intending to impose your Faith on others.

Cruze's actions to date lead me to believe he is the former.
He will not get elected unless he can convince those that would believe otherwise.

A fair view.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

mojo84 wrote: COMPRESSED FOR SPACE

In other words, you don't know.

You asked how do I know. There you go.
Net favorable among Republicans with an opinion: for Walker and Rubio are in the 70s. Cruz is 54%
http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-m ... aign=tiles" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Among both conservatives and moderates he has higher negatives than Walker.

Are we voting in the primary today? Are the others even candidates yet?

Bottom line, you don't know. You are only expressing you opinion. Rather than knock a guy, why not get on board and help your guy?

mojo84 wrote:
Are we voting in the primary today? Have the others even candidates yet?

Bottom line, you don't know. You are only expressing you opinion. Rather than knock a guy, why not get on board and help your guy?

Cause he's not my guy? I haven't picked a guy yet. I welcome him entering and the debate though.

This is true though. I am expressing my opinion, just as your are. As this is not a math test everything we post is an opinion.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

mojo84 wrote:
Are we voting in the primary today? Have the others even candidates yet?

Bottom line, you don't know. You are only expressing you opinion. Rather than knock a guy, why not get on board and help your guy?

Cause he's not my guy? I haven't picked a guy yet. I welcome him entering and the debate though.

This is true though. I am expressing my opinion, just as your are. As this is not a math test everything we post is an opinion.

But you keep stating things as if they are fact when in fact they are only your opinion.

I've played the game long enough and have grown tired of it.

Lot of American History mixed in this new flag here. No matter how true this flag is today, with the wrong person flying it the slow spiral will continue and nothing will be gained. We don't need an experienced "Electable Politician" driving the bus. We need the Constitution in the seat with the pedal mashed to the floor. I think many Americans are cowards afraid of the dangers of Liberty and will have to be dragged towards it kicking and screaming. We are voting for "things" and have been for decades. The producers keep producing and the takers continue taking and look at the people of these United States now, barely able to sustain themselves and there stands Washington in all it's history, traditions and glory, stealing from unborn generations and destroying the greatest Nation ever built with every Act.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:Those who state that Ted Cruz has no experience seem to forget that the current loser in chief has not ever produced anything worthwhile in his entire life.

Yep both he and Cruz are one term Senators.

Ted Cruz beats most if not all other candidates hands down in just his intellectual ability and his love for the Constitution.

The guy was on the floor of the Senate reciting Green Eggs and Ham? Isn't Obama cited for his intellectual ability?
You're not helping your case here.

Sometimes you amaze me. When you filibuster, you are reduced to reading something eventually. He could have read the Constitution, the Bible, 1984 or anything else. Reading Green Eggs and Ham says ZERO about his intellect, and you know it. Why engage in such sophism?

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

If you listen to his speech, you'd understand. He said that millions of Christian conservatives do not vote. His appeal was directly to them. Get off your duffs and get to the polls and we can win this thing.

I'm not a Christian conservative. I'm a libertarian. I don't want some foam at the mouth bible thumper trying to use the government to tell me what to do any more than some Austin/Berkeley Nanny stater.

EDIT: I actually have no problems with Christian conservatives or their beliefs. Its not my fault they don't understand a proper service involves a bottle of wine at the sermon, and many bottles of wine at the social that evening.
I just don't want them telling me what to do any more than any one else telling me what to do.

Can you name ONE foam at the mouth bible thumper politician? ONE?? It certainly isn't Cruz. Why bring this up? Are you deliberately trying to stir things up?

baldeagle wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

If you listen to his speech, you'd understand. He said that millions of Christian conservatives do not vote. His appeal was directly to them. Get off your duffs and get to the polls and we can win this thing.

I'm not a Christian conservative. I'm a libertarian. I don't want some foam at the mouth bible thumper trying to use the government to tell me what to do any more than some Austin/Berkeley Nanny stater.

EDIT: I actually have no problems with Christian conservatives or their beliefs. Its not my fault they don't understand a proper service involves a bottle of wine at the sermon, and many bottles of wine at the social that evening.
I just don't want them telling me what to do any more than any one else telling me what to do.

Can you name ONE foam at the mouth bible thumper politician? ONE?? It certainly isn't Cruz. Why bring this up? Are you deliberately trying to stir things up?

Ding ding ding! We have a winner!

This thread has evolved from a discussion on a candidate to an endless loop of people responding to one person over and over. If we're not careful, this thread will get locked (or is that the plan?!?).

baldeagle wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:Those who state that Ted Cruz has no experience seem to forget that the current loser in chief has not ever produced anything worthwhile in his entire life.

Yep both he and Cruz are one term Senators.

Ted Cruz beats most if not all other candidates hands down in just his intellectual ability and his love for the Constitution.

The guy was on the floor of the Senate reciting Green Eggs and Ham? Isn't Obama cited for his intellectual ability?
You're not helping your case here.

Sometimes you amaze me. When you filibuster, you are reduced to reading something eventually. He could have read the Constitution, the Bible, 1984 or anything else. Reading Green Eggs and Ham says ZERO about his intellect, and you know it. Why engage in such sophism?

Because thats the only thing that will be remembered.

What is up with I changed the Music I like after 9:11? What kind of nonsense is this?

Beiruty wrote:What is up with I changed the Music I like after 9:11? What kind of nonsense is this?

You might want to quote the post you are referring to. This thread is pretty long.

Seussville & Washington. I think Seussville produces more substance. Green Eggs or Ammo Bans...

This thread has evolved from a discussion on a candidate to an endless loop of people responding to one person over and over. If we're not careful, this thread will get locked (or is that the plan?!?).

Thats fair. I'll stop with the notation that, again, although I'm not a fan as President, I welcome his voice in the election. Its what democracy is all about.