Why Ted Cruz is the smartest wolf in the pack

[TitanTiger 22,258]

Another fascinating take on the election and why certain candidates that one might not expect are doing well. I need to find a good one on Sanders. But this, I think, is insightful. And as the author says, this is not an endorsement. It's just an observation of what seems to be happening:

Why Ted Cruz is the Smartest Wolf in the Pack

January 18, 2016 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker

OK. Right up front in case anyone is getting all nervous about a priest commenting on politics: This is not an endorsement of Ted Cruz. Stop biting your fingernails. I’m not telling you to vote Republican. I’m not saying Ted Cruz is a great guy or would be a great president.

However, I am commenting as an American citizen on what is one of the most interesting presidential elections in living history.

It interests me because Ted Cruz is one very smart guy. You only have to check his credentials: his history as a college debater, his record as a lawyer, and his savvy work in Congress to realize that he is not a dull knife.

Here’s what he’s done smart: first he got elected as a Senator to give him enough political experience in Washington to be credible, but he maintained a reputation in Congress as a maverick, an outsider and one who was challenging the system. Consequently he is able to satisfy people who want both a man with experience and an outsider.

Second, he understands the mood of the electorate. They desperately want a change from the same old corrupt Washington-Wall Street ruling elite, but they feel betrayed by Obama who promised such a change, but didn’t deliver. Most of all he understands that the “silent majority” in America are really, really fed up and not only fed up but threatened. They’re angry and scared. Cruz understands that. He therefore understands their attraction to the overblown rhetoric of Trump and is delivering the same message, but seems to do so with sanity and experience and seeming restraint.

Therefore Cruz has positioned himself as the “sensible and experienced Trump.” He played it as if he and Trump were pals–which makes a good number of Trump supporters regard Cruz as the conservative who can actually win–even the conservative with Trump’s implicit endorsement. Furthermore, Cruz’s experience and debating skills will eventually win the gut level Trump supporters over to his side once they start thinking things through.

Cruz also understands the Evangelical vote. He knows how many of them don’t have any time for a thrice married casino fat cat who makes flippant remarks about how much he loves God. Cruz also knows that his “New York values” jibe was not a mistake in the flyover states, and that’s where he will get the support he needs. He knows how much the heartland voters love both an outsider and an underdog. He will therefore paint himself as the “son of immigrants”–refugees from Communist Cuba. He will paint himself as the typical immigrant boy made good who was smart enough and worked hard enough to eventually be president. He will paint himself as a son of Texas–the Southern heartland, and believe me–he knows how potent this image is for Americans. Look at every president since the second world war. Each one–with the exception of Bush Sr. (who went on to lose the White House) has portrayed himself as a down home boy made good. Even Bush Jr painted himself as a Texas rancher not as the East coast Ivy League boy he really was.

Finally, look at the way Cruz has finessed the Trump threat.

He understands the genuine threat of Trump and he has handled this very, very expertly. Here’s the problem: if everybody attacks Trump non stop that will only make Trump’s supporters more devoted. Furthermore, if the attacks are by the establishment media and the establishment politicians like Bush, then Trump’s gang rally around him ever more strongly. Cruz understands the “martyr mentality” within the right wing electorate. He also understands that if the whole Republican machine excludes Trump then it is all the more probable that Trump will run as an independent and divide the Republican vote giving Hillary the White House.

So, when everybody else was attacking Trump, Cruz stood back and kept quiet. He knows voter psychology. He knows people who are responding at gut level (and that is the only level Trump appeals to) will react against attacks on their hero and against the one attacking, thus destroying the attacker and strengthening Trump. So Cruz not only kept quiet but played it out as Trump’s pal. All the time he was networking behind the scenes and at ground level so that as his stock began rising, the inevitable attack from Trump would come. It has come and now Cruz is the poor little guy who is being attacked. He’s the underdog from the heartland being attacked by the big bad New York city billionaire.

After Trump attacks Cruz, here is what Cruz will do. He will paint himself as the poor little guy who s being attacked, but he will go on a “sweetness attack”. He won’t attack Trump head on, but he will come across as the sincere, good Evangelical boy from the homeland and sincerely and sweetly point out that Trump is a New York establishment guy who has had three wives, runs casinos, is buddies with the Clintons and whose Daddy gave him all his money to start with.

This is high drama, and it’s fascinating to see Cruz play out his game plan.

As I say, he is one very, very smart politician. It is my prediction that he will win the Republican nomination and then the White House.

However, I should remind readers that the smartest politician is not necessarily the best candidate for president.

A very smart man might be a great president…..or he might be the most dangerous candidate of all.

http://www.patheos.c...n-the-pack.html

[Grumps 3,706]

Very interesting read. Thanks!

[TheBlueVue 177]

Another fascinating take on the election and why certain candidates that one might not expect are doing well. I need to find a good one on Sanders. But this, I think, is insightful. And as the author says, this is not an endorsement. It's just an observation of what seems to be happening:

Why Ted Cruz is the Smartest Wolf in the Pack

January 18, 2016 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker

OK. Right up front in case anyone is getting all nervous about a priest commenting on politics: This is not an endorsement of Ted Cruz. Stop biting your fingernails. I’m not telling you to vote Republican. I’m not saying Ted Cruz is a great guy or would be a great president.

However, I am commenting as an American citizen on what is one of the most interesting presidential elections in living history.

It interests me because Ted Cruz is one very smart guy. You only have to check his credentials: his history as a college debater, his record as a lawyer, and his savvy work in Congress to realize that he is not a dull knife.

Here’s what he’s done smart: first he got elected as a Senator to give him enough political experience in Washington to be credible, but he maintained a reputation in Congress as a maverick, an outsider and one who was challenging the system. Consequently he is able to satisfy people who want both a man with experience and an outsider.

Second, he understands the mood of the electorate. They desperately want a change from the same old corrupt Washington-Wall Street ruling elite, but they feel betrayed by Obama who promised such a change, but didn’t deliver. Most of all he understands that the “silent majority” in America are really, really fed up and not only fed up but threatened. They’re angry and scared. Cruz understands that. He therefore understands their attraction to the overblown rhetoric of Trump and is delivering the same message, but seems to do so with sanity and experience and seeming restraint.

Therefore Cruz has positioned himself as the “sensible and experienced Trump.” He played it as if he and Trump were pals–which makes a good number of Trump supporters regard Cruz as the conservative who can actually win–even the conservative with Trump’s implicit endorsement. Furthermore, Cruz’s experience and debating skills will eventually win the gut level Trump supporters over to his side once they start thinking things through.

Cruz also understands the Evangelical vote. He knows how many of them don’t have any time for a thrice married casino fat cat who makes flippant remarks about how much he loves God. Cruz also knows that his “New York values” jibe was not a mistake in the flyover states, and that’s where he will get the support he needs. He knows how much the heartland voters love both an outsider and an underdog. He will therefore paint himself as the “son of immigrants”–refugees from Communist Cuba. He will paint himself as the typical immigrant boy made good who was smart enough and worked hard enough to eventually be president. He will paint himself as a son of Texas–the Southern heartland, and believe me–he knows how potent this image is for Americans. Look at every president since the second world war. Each one–with the exception of Bush Sr. (who went on to lose the White House) has portrayed himself as a down home boy made good. Even Bush Jr painted himself as a Texas rancher not as the East coast Ivy League boy he really was.

Finally, look at the way Cruz has finessed the Trump threat.

He understands the genuine threat of Trump and he has handled this very, very expertly. Here’s the problem: if everybody attacks Trump non stop that will only make Trump’s supporters more devoted. Furthermore, if the attacks are by the establishment media and the establishment politicians like Bush, then Trump’s gang rally around him ever more strongly. Cruz understands the “martyr mentality” within the right wing electorate. He also understands that if the whole Republican machine excludes Trump then it is all the more probable that Trump will run as an independent and divide the Republican vote giving Hillary the White House.

So, when everybody else was attacking Trump, Cruz stood back and kept quiet. He knows voter psychology. He knows people who are responding at gut level (and that is the only level Trump appeals to) will react against attacks on their hero and against the one attacking, thus destroying the attacker and strengthening Trump. So Cruz not only kept quiet but played it out as Trump’s pal. All the time he was networking behind the scenes and at ground level so that as his stock began rising, the inevitable attack from Trump would come. It has come and now Cruz is the poor little guy who is being attacked. He’s the underdog from the heartland being attacked by the big bad New York city billionaire.

After Trump attacks Cruz, here is what Cruz will do. He will paint himself as the poor little guy who s being attacked, but he will go on a “sweetness attack”. He won’t attack Trump head on, but he will come across as the sincere, good Evangelical boy from the homeland and sincerely and sweetly point out that Trump is a New York establishment guy who has had three wives, runs casinos, is buddies with the Clintons and whose Daddy gave him all his money to start with.

This is high drama, and it’s fascinating to see Cruz play out his game plan.

As I say, he is one very, very smart politician. It is my prediction that he will win the Republican nomination and then the White House.

However, I should remind readers that the smartest politician is not necessarily the best candidate for president.

A very smart man might be a great president…..or he might be the most dangerous candidate of all.

http://www.patheos.c...n-the-pack.html

As I have been saying all along, Cruz is brilliant. Harvard Law Professor, Alan Dershowitz, (no conservative mind you) said he was the, by far, the most brilliant debater he had ever taught at Harvard Law. Leaving that aside the way he played nice with Trump until now was strategically brilliant as well.

Its interesting to me that the writer evidently perceives no danger in 4 more years of Obama's agenda which Clinton continues to tell America that's what she stands for nor in a more socialistic agenda that is Bernie Sanders vision that would cost taxpayers $19 trillion to implement. Nah, no dangers there!

In the end, all nice things printed about republicans seem to have to include the obligatory caveat of the "possible danger" they pose for the country. I don't see conservatism being that dangerous frankly...smaller govt thus at least an effort slow down deficit spending...oh, and please spare me the but Bush was a big govt big spender reminder....I already know that and have stated many times the entire Bush clan should have been democrats and that includes Jeb. Simplifying the tax code, being pro business with a demonstrable and unapologetic return to the principles of capitalism that made America the greatest force for the good in the history of the world are not dangerous propositions in my view but, that's just me. We currently have a business environment where more small businesses are closing than are opening..does anyone see no danger in that trend should a blind eye be turned toward it by allowing it to continue? Small businesses are Americas biggest employers, that trend cannot stand.

Moreover, I dont see him being any more dangerous to our national security than anyone else in either field may be. We live in a dangerous time in which the challenges of safety and national security have probably changed forever into more of an asymmetric warfare type of environment. Danger consistently lurks in places they traditionally have not and regardless, who the next President is, these dangers will not immediately abate. I see less danger in recognizing those threats to our way of life, being honest about them and making policy decisions addressing them than I do in pretending they don't exist.

In the end, the status quo that the establishment on both sides represents is by far the greatest danger Americans currently face. Clearly, their agenda is all about appeasing the elitist donor class including themselves obviously, their lobbyists and their contractors and less about addressing the everyday struggles of folks in fly over country.

In fairness, there are possible dangers in every candidate. The hope and change Obama has tirelessly sold America has been fraught with peril and has set us on a course of becoming a govt of people and not of a govt of laws. That's how 3rd world politics operate and America deserves better but that is a topic for another thread.

[TitanTiger 22,258]

Its interesting to me that the writer evidently perceives no danger in 4 more years of Obama's agenda which Clinton continues to tell America that's what she stands for nor in a more socialistic agenda that is Bernie Sanders vision that would cost taxpayers $19 trillion to implement. Nah, no dangers there!

You have a persistent problem in forming arguments properly. You project or read things that aren't there. What the writer thinks about Obama's agenda (or HRC continuing it) isn't even brought up. It isn't germane to the article. He's simply discussing how Cruz has managed to play his hand against Trump. This doesn't mean he "perceives no danger" from a Clinton victory. It simply means that Clinton wasn't being discussed at the moment.

It's something you do with people's arguments here as well. You take something they say and turn it into an entirely different argument and attribute attitudes and beliefs to them that weren't even insinuated, much less articulated.

In the end, all nice things printed about republicans seem to have to include the obligatory caveat of the "possible danger" they pose for the country.

He simply pointed out reality - that being a smart candidate, expertly reading the mood of the electorate and employing the right strategy where others fail - does not mean you'll make a great president. You could be, or you could be ineffective or even dangerous. That's wasn't a shot a Republicans in general, it was simply a true statement that could also apply to the insurgent candidate on the left - Bernie Sanders. It's just that this wasn't an article about Sanders so putting in all the qualifiers and caveats that would smooth your ruffled feathers wasn't necessary.

[homersapien 12,877]

Cruz is as embedded in the Wall Street power structure as any candidate. Yes, he is very smart. He's also psychopathic, or at least acts as one.

I agree with the last thing the author said. He is actively dangerous (as opposed to cluelessly dangerous)

[homersapien 12,877]

Its interesting to me that the writer evidently perceives no danger in 4 more years of Obama's agenda which Clinton continues to tell America that's what she stands for nor in a more socialistic agenda that is Bernie Sanders vision that would cost taxpayers $19 trillion to implement. Nah, no dangers there!

You have a persistent problem in forming arguments properly. You project or read things that aren't there. What the writer thinks about Obama's agenda (or HRC continuing it) isn't even brought up. It isn't germane to the article. He's simply discussing how Cruz has managed to play his hand against Trump. This doesn't mean he "perceives no danger" from a Clinton victory. It simply means that Clinton wasn't being discussed at the moment.

It's something you do with people's arguments here as well. You take something they say and turn it into an entirely different argument and attribute attitudes and beliefs to them that weren't even insinuated, much less articulated.

S.O.P.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Its interesting to me that the writer evidently perceives no danger in 4 more years of Obama's agenda which Clinton continues to tell America that's what she stands for nor in a more socialistic agenda that is Bernie Sanders vision that would cost taxpayers $19 trillion to implement. Nah, no dangers there!

You have a persistent problem in forming arguments properly. You project or read things that aren't there. What the writer thinks about Obama's agenda (or HRC continuing it) isn't even brought up. It isn't germane to the article. He's simply discussing how Cruz has managed to play his hand against Trump. This doesn't mean he "perceives no danger" from a Clinton victory. It simply means that Clinton wasn't being discussed at the moment.

It's something you do with people's arguments here as well. You take something they say and turn it into an entirely different argument and attribute attitudes and beliefs to them that weren't even insinuated, much less articulated.

In the end, all nice things printed about republicans seem to have to include the obligatory caveat of the "possible danger" they pose for the country.

He simply pointed out reality - that being a smart candidate, expertly reading the mood of the electorate and employing the right strategy where others fail - does not mean you'll make a great president. You could be, or you could be ineffective or even dangerous. That's wasn't a shot a Republicans in general, it was simply a true statement that could also apply to the insurgent candidate on the left - Bernie Sanders. It's just that this wasn't an article about Sanders so putting in all the qualifiers and caveats that would smooth your ruffled feathers wasn't necessary.

I just posted my reaction to the article. i wasn't interested in forming an argument. My feathers aren't ruffled at all but this article, like most, especially about republicans, carried the same tone of caution to voters. It seems so contrived and almost condescending. If you did not perceive that tone, no problem, I did and I responded accordingly. Frankly, I wasn't seeking nor do I need your approval but thanks for all your thoughtful advice.

[AUUSN 823]

Frankly, I wasn't seeking nor do I need your approval but thanks for all your thoughtful advice.

[JoeBags7277 760]

Frankly, I wasn't seeking nor do I need your approval but thanks for all your thoughtful advice.

[TitanTiger 22,258]

I just posted my reaction to the article. i wasn't interested in forming an argument. My feathers aren't ruffled at all but this article, like most, especially about republicans, carried the same tone of caution to voters. It seems so contrived and almost condescending. If you did not perceive that tone, no problem, I did and I responded accordingly. Frankly, I wasn't seeking nor do I need your approval but thanks for all your thoughtful advice.

It's not advice, it's an observation of your habits. You constantly want to bring up things that aren't germane to the discussion and pretend they are. I can only assume it's either because you cannot handle criticism of your most preciously held beliefs and must engage in deflection to cope, or you simply don't know how to respond to certain arguments so you must reframe the issue so that you may argue on ground you are more comfortable with.

[cooltigger21 0]

Cruz has been masterful at how he's handled this campaign so far. He was very classy in his reaction to the Palin endorsement of Trump while Trump did his usual rant on Glenn Beck.