ADVERTISEMENT

Cruz’s ‘Consistent Conservatism’ Infectious With His Supporters

bigbadjohn45

All American
Jul 9, 2010
4,301
24
38
Cruz’s ‘Consistent Conservatism’ Infectious With His Supporters
Matt Vespa | Feb 02, 2016

430e6ff5-ce89-40e6-9486-33ee99fddeb2.jpg


DES MOINES, Iowa– With Cruz clinching victory in Iowa, he reminded the establishment and the media that they aren’t going to decide this election. He also prided himself on his record as a “consistent conservative,” and how this will be key to winning in November; he believes the Reagan Coalition is coming back. And this consistent conservatism was infectious with his supporters at his victory party last night. Additionally, while Iowa caucus-goers were present, there were supporters from out-of-state who arrived at the watch party to show their support.

In some people, it takes the form of extreme excitement. One woman behind me in the packed Ellwell Center on the State Fairgrounds had the energy exuded after drinking at least nine Red Bulls; another Cruz supporter next to her actually told her to calm down, though he commended her enthusiasm. But for most, it was exhibited in the form on indefatigable support for Cruz, his beliefs, and his agenda for the country should he win the Republican nomination and the subsequent general election.

Suzette Henriksen of Pleasant Hill #3 was pleased that her caucus meeting broke for Cruz. She showed me on her phone the results etched on a blackboard showing Cruz winning with 72 votes, followed by Trump (48), Rubio (34), and Carson (11).

“He’s conservative,” she said. “He’s not afraid to stand up to the establishment.” And his beliefs aligned with hers on a whole host of issues.

Jeff Ropp, another Cruz supporter, noted “when you hear him talk and his voting record; I like what I see.” Deb Harris, who was sitting next to Ropp agreed.

“I see someone even-keeled, who can get stuff done,” she said.

Hailing from Illinois, Dave Shragal and Cathy Ross had a business meeting in Des Moines during caucus day and being in the Cruz camp, decided to show up and watch the results. Moreover, they never experienced a caucus before and decided to stick around and see it in action.

“He’s [Cruz] independent. He’s independent of his own party. He’s his own man–and I think he’s willing to do right for the American people rather than what’s not necessarily what’s right for the political class,” he said. “People are kind of fed up with both parties, looking out for their own best interests and not the American people’s,” he added.

Ross said, “It was long overdue for a change.

Shragal liked the fact that Cruz is trying to rein in government, and apply fiscal standards that most Americans have had to establish since the Obama presidency.

“I like the fact that he looks at downsizing government, or right-sizing it you might say. The same way every household has to manage within their budget; he wants to hold the government up to the same kind of standards,” he said. “I think that people can differ with him…he’s morally a good guy and wants to try and do the right thing.

Rich and Sandy Selden said their caucus in Ankeny 7 went for Rubio, with 43 votes, while Trump and Cruz tied at 37. Yet, Sandy did not hold back on her feelings about the Donald.

“I hate Trump,” she said. When speaking of the 2016 GOP field, she said, “I would have liked anyone but Trump,” but she went with Cruz since he’s the candidate she likes the most; she’s supported him since April. She also appreciated that he’s a “staunch constitutionalist,” who doesn’t “cave to the pressures of Washington.” Also, his pro-life credentials are something she highly respects in Cruz. In short, the Texas senator embodies all the values she holds dear.

While she didn’t say that she’s against gay marriage per se, she was explicitly against how it’s been implemented in this country via the courts. It should be left to the states, and most importantly, the legislatures, which is how our Constitution was set up for our nation to move forward democratically.

Rich noted that “integrity matters,” and “saying what you mean and doing what you say” is key to winning over his support. He also noted that Trump’s special event on the night of the Fox News debate at Drake was “a Celebrity Apprentice event.” Both of them also noted that they didn’t see much of a ground game from the Trump campaign, but did mention that their meeting was over capacity, highlighting the record turnout this year.

Rebel Snodgrass agreed with the Sandy Selden’s constitutionalist stances saying of Cruz, that his votes align 88 percent of the time with how the Constitution is suppose to be interpreted. He caucused for Cruz at his precinct–Lincoln 2–in Indiaola, about 12 miles south of Des Moines, but added that he didn’t know who won since he and his wife, Julie, left the meeting in order to be able to make it to the party

Julie said it was either Cruz or Rand Paul for her choices.

Catherine Frazier, Cruz’s national press secretary, noted the momentum Cruz has gained in the Hawkeye State, noting that they were trialing the Donald in the polls a couple of weeks ago and to be running neck-and-neck with him by caucus day was in itself an achievement. She added that the campaign has an incredible organization, which evidently paid off dividends with their win.

“Tonight shows that conservatives are coalescing around Cruz,” she said. Voters are “fed up with Washington,” and want someone who will stand up and not cuddle up to the establishment.”
 
I agree that Trump is simply a no-go...yesterday sealed it for me. His whining is beyond me. Why would a man who has a big lead in NH not just put on his big boy pants and do the grunt work necessary to win the state - you would think he would have learned after losing Iowa.

Meanwhile, it could be a real battle between Cruz and Rubio in the long run.

I think it would be fair to Rubio for you to post Rush commentary on him yesterday...just a thought.
 
There are some things I like about Trump...like his disdain for political correctness. And, its a big if, if I had to choose between him and Hillary then I would vote for Trump.

But he was far from my first choice.
 
I agree that Trump is simply a no-go...yesterday sealed it for me. His whining is beyond me. Why would a man who has a big lead in NH not just put on his big boy pants and do the grunt work necessary to win the state - you would think he would have learned after losing Iowa.

Meanwhile, it could be a real battle between Cruz and Rubio in the long run.

I think it would be fair to Rubio for you to post Rush commentary on him yesterday...just a thought.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike, here are my thoughts about Rubio:

The Republican establishment is now uniting behind Marco Rubio in yet another attempt to maintain the status quo in Washington.

But it wasn't always this way.

In his 2010 Senate race, the GOP establishment fought tooth and nail to defeat Marco Rubio. He campaigned as an anti-amnesty, limited government conservative, which was a threat to Republican leaders who prefer to compromise with the Democrats.

Now the establishment loves Marco Rubio – not because the establishment changed, but because Marco Rubio did.

You see as soon as Marco Rubio was elected, he immediately began to cozy up with GOP leaders and establishment donors.

When major policy fights arose, Rubio often voted right to maintain the appearance of a conservative while he remained quiet to please the establishment. It was pure political calculation.

Ted Cruz's record is different.

Ted Cruz kept his word and fought for conservative principles even when it caused him to be attacked by Democrats and Republicans alike.

When it was time to fight funding for Obamacare, Ted Cruz led the fight while Marco Rubio remained in the shadows.

When it was time to fight the Democrats' effort to trample on the Second Amendment with new gun control laws, Ted Cruz led the fight to preserve our liberty while Marco Rubio remained in the shadows.

When it was time to fight the Republican leaders who were trying to secretly pass another increase in the debt limit, Ted Cruz led the fight for a balanced budget while Marco Rubio remained in the shadows.

When it was time to take a stand against cronyism by speaking out against Ethanol subsides, Ted Cruz courageously told the truth in Iowa while Marco Rubio remained in the shadows.

Washington isn't going to change itself. We need someone who is willing to take the political bullets and arrows to get the job done.

The only time Marco Rubio ever fought for anything was when he helped Chuck Schumer and the Democrats pass the "Gang of Eight" amnesty bill, which Ted Cruz opposed and ultimately defeated.

This is why the Republican establishment is uniting behind Marco Rubio. They know that he will continue the status quo.

If Americans want to change Washington, the choice is clear.

Ted Cruz is the only candidate in the race who has consistently stood up to the DC establishment – the ONLY one.
 
BBJ, as a money contributing supporter of Cruz like you, I agree that Cruz is the best choice for conservatives but will gladly support Rubio should he become the nominee. As a hawk, I appreciate his strong stand against Islamic terrorism.
 
Last edited:
Who says the establishment is behind Rubio other than media pundits?

Did you read what Rush said? While Cruz is my number 1 choice, I would gladly vote for Rubio. Meanwhile, you do realize that they only way Cruz or Rubio wins is if the Establishment and the other come together and actually vote - the reason why Romney lost is because a lot of evangelicals and so called "pure" conservatives didn't vote - and now this very group is making some strong demands. Are we better off with this strategy?

I get where your coming from, but don't throw out the Baby with the bath water - keep in mind Cruz has his negatives as well, I think some are blind to those. There is no one perfect candidate.
 
BBJ, as a money contributing supporter of Cruz like you, I agree that Cruz is the best choice for conservatives but I will gladly support Rubio should he become the nominee. As a hawk, I appreciate his strong stand against Islamic terrorism.

Flash, Rubio lied to and sold out his Florida constituents to whom he promised his staunch opposition to amnesty. He then turned right around and sold them down the river as he sided with the Democrats with his authorship of the "Gang of Eight" amnesty bill. Were it not for Ted Cruz, this bill would've passed. Rubio would essentially be another McCain or Romney to me if he's the nominee; yes, I'd reluctantly vote for him (while holding my nose).
 
Who says the establishment is behind Rubio other than media pundits?

Did you read what Rush said? While Cruz is my number 1 choice, I would gladly vote for Rubio. Meanwhile, you do realize that they only way Cruz or Rubio wins is if the Establishment and the other come together and actually vote - the reason why Romney lost is because a lot of evangelicals and so called "pure" conservatives didn't vote - and now this very group is making some strong demands. Are we better off with this strategy?

I get where your coming from, but don't throw out the Baby with the bath water - keep in mind Cruz has his negatives as well, I think some are blind to those. There is no one perfect candidate.

"Who says the establishment is behind Rubio other than media pundits"?

The answer to that is easy, Mike. Just follow the money and the adoring press Rubio's now receiving. They've obviously latched onto him as their "savior" to defeat their despised arch enemy, Ted Cruz. They will do or say anything to prevent Cruz from getting the nomination. Now that Jeb! is apparently history, Rubio's now their boy.
 
During the 2012 convention the establishment passed rules making the primaries nothing more than a dog and pony show. The establishment can nominate whomever they want no matter what.
 
During the 2012 convention the establishment passed rules making the primaries nothing more than a dog and pony show. The establishment can nominate whomever they want no matter what.

Lynn, okay, if you would, walk us through how this would work. Let's say, for example, Ted Cruz garners whatever the delegate total needed to secure the Republican nomination. How is this snatched away from him?
 
Yikes Trump and Cruz beat each other up while rubio gains some support. Sounds like a familiar story.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT