If Trumps changing stances will harm him...

[jimnyc]

Then I wonder how much Cruz will be harmed?

(videos at linked site as well)
-----

Ted Cruz’s 10 Biggest Flip Flops

1. Allowing The States To Legalize Marijuana

Ted Cruz raised the eyebrows of many libertarians at CPAC 2015 when he told Sean Hannity that he supported allowing the states to legalize marijuana if the citizens of that state voted for it. This was a reversal of a position he had taken previously at the Texas Public Policy Conference in 2014. If you watch the video below, from 7:21-8:41 after joking about the ‘Colorado brownies’ the crowd had been provided with, Cruz argued that while “reasonable arguments” can be made about legalizing pot, the president ignored criminal laws by circumventing congress and telling the people to ignore the law. While the only explicit reference to the states in question was made in a joking manner, the line of logic most certainly applies to Obama’s decision regarding the two (now four) states where marijuana is legal recreationally, as they are in violation of the Controlled Substances Act. This was reflected in the media coverage of the remark, which was universally that Cruz had attacked Obama’s allowing of Washington and Colorado to enforce their own drug laws. Cruz made similar remarks in an interview with Reason Magazine, where Cruz called Obama’s refusal to enforce marijuana laws “dangerous to liberty”, and demanded that he go to congress instead of deciding to refuse to enforce the law. He claimed Obama’s approach to drug policy is to “announce that they will stop enforcing certain drug laws”, and said that was a “very dangerous precedent”.

2. Background Checks On Guns

While flip flopping on marijuana may strike some as a relatively minor and even predictable issue for somebody trying to bridge the gap between libertarians and conservatives, an issue where many may be shocked to find Cruz flip flopping is gun control. Though he threatened to filibuster any bill that strengthens federal background checks on the Senate Floor, in a Fox News Sunday interview he expressed a desire to improve the quality of the federal database by tightening loopholes surrounding localities not reporting mental health problems and criminal convictions. This stands in direct contrast to his pledge to vote against any expansion of gun control.

3. TPA

Trade Promotion Authority became a major topic in the Fall of 2015 and conservatives across the country reacted in disgust at the notion that we would grant Barack Obama exclusive powers over the trade agreement process. One of the people who was opposing conservatives on the issue was Ted Cruz, writing an Op-Ed alongside future house speaker Paul Ryan in support of the agreement. After seeing the outcry among grassroots conservatives across the country, however, Cruz quickly reversed his position, siding with conservatives against the President’s power. This flip flop is probably the most blatant on the list both in its clarity and appearance of political calculation, and it should cause all conservatives to question Cruz’s view of executive power.

4. Birthright Citizenship

Senator Cruz has come out against birthright citizenship in this campaign, arguing that it does not make sense on a policy level and that on a constitutional level it is questionable. As Megyn Kelly points out in the video below, this is a total reversal of his 2011 stance in favor of birthright citizenship. In 2011 Cruz stated that birthright citizenship was protected by the Constitution and the arguments against it were not very good. When confronted by Megyn Kelly on this blatant flip flop, Cruz avoided the issue. I have also included the clip of Cruz’s 2011 statement in its entirety.

5. Agriculture & Flood Insurance

Ted Cruz has often railed against government subsidies, and even hit rival Marco Rubio over his support of sugar subsidies during the Fox Business debate, but when his political interests are tied to subsidies he changes his tune. Cruz has been on the record both on the campaign trail and in Senate votes supporting agricultural insurance, arguing that there is a legitimate federal role in providing agriculture insurance. He has also voted in favor of national flood insurance, a program which disproportionately aids his coastal state. Cruz has certainly demonstrated a willingness to compromise his principles for political gain in the area of government subsidies.

6. Abolishing the TSA

When Ted Cruz ran for Senate one of the issues he ran on was abolishing the TSA. Cruz attracted libertarian support with this issue and used it very effectively to recruit Young Americans for Liberty activists to help his campaign. Unfortunately, Senator Cruz released his list of government agencies to eliminate, and the TSA was not on the list. Cruz’s campaign manager is also a co-founder of the Chertoff group, a group which profited from TSA body scanners, drawing questions as to his sincerity on this issue.

7. Government Stimulus

Ted Cruz has positioned himself as a vocal opponent of government waste, and a Republican who would not participate in bailouts. While representing the Texas Retired Teachers Association, Cruz argued that the one time payment from the stimulus program “will directly impact the economy in both the metropolitan and rural areas of Texas, and will directly further the greater purpose of economic recovery for America”. Though some will argue that his role as the attorney of this group mandated he argue on their behalf, a principled conservative would refuse to argue such a case, as it is directly contrary to their values. Cruz’s argument is disturbing coming from a man who wants to be commander in chief.

8. No Child Left Behind

Ted Cruz has positioned himself as a vocal opponent of Common Core, stating that education should be returned to states and localities. He has even stated he would support allowing school districts to opt out of No Child Left Behind. But in his essay, “The Rise Of Opportunity Conservatism”, Cruz wrote that “Some critics have objected to the increased federal money going to education, but the bill also requires testing of every child in third and eighth grades and requires schools to provide parents with detailed report cards of the school’s performance. . . . The focus is on accountability and results.”. In this essay, where Cruz also defended Bush as a very conservative president despite his spending record, the Bush insider turned presidential candidate outlines his affection for Bush’s “Opportunity conservatism” that would spawn the tea party due to its disregard for limits on big government.

9. John Roberts

Ted Cruz has taken a position as a staunch opponent of John Roberts in this campaign, even calling for his resignation over the Obamacare ruling. That being said, Cruz was a vocal supporter of John Roberts for many years, calling him a principled conservative and one of the most talented lawyers in the country. This manifested in an exchange where Jeb Bush managed to get the better of Cruz, calling him out for his support of John Roberts and exposing his flip flop.

10. HB1 Visas

Ted Cruz was a vocal supporter of expanding HB1 visas as recently as 2013, advocating for the expansion of these visas by 500%. He has argued for the expansion of these visas both on the Senate floor and in the media, but under pressure from Donald Trump for the votes of anti immigration Republicans, Cruz has now proposed that we suspend the program and investigate it for abuse. He says there is “report after report after report of big companies abusing the HB1 program”. His 180 on this issue is a direct result of the rise of Donald Trump, which seems to have made most of the Republican candidates go a little crazy.

http://www.libertyconservatives.com/ted-cruzs-biggest-flip-flops/

[Gunny]

And Trump was a Dem and gave money to Billary. Don't look in the mirror if the picture's too rough.

[jimnyc]

And Trump was a Dem and gave money to Billary. Don't look in the mirror if the picture's too rough.

Look in the mirror? What the fuck are you rambling about now? Who even mentioned Trump? Undoubtedly, there are many times you just reply without reading or thinking.

[jimnyc]

And Trump was a Dem and gave money to Billary. Don't look in the mirror if the picture's too rough.

But thanks for proving my point, that some want to spend time non-stop obsessing over Trump but are afraid to point out flip flops and such about others. Seems to me like it's YOU who can't handle it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Then I wonder how much Cruz will be harmed?

(videos at linked site as well)
-----

Ted Cruz’s 10 Biggest Flip Flops

1. Allowing The States To Legalize Marijuana

Ted Cruz raised the eyebrows of many libertarians at CPAC 2015 when he told Sean Hannity that he supported allowing the states to legalize marijuana if the citizens of that state voted for it. This was a reversal of a position he had taken previously at the Texas Public Policy Conference in 2014. If you watch the video below, from 7:21-8:41 after joking about the ‘Colorado brownies’ the crowd had been provided with, Cruz argued that while “reasonable arguments” can be made about legalizing pot, the president ignored criminal laws by circumventing congress and telling the people to ignore the law. While the only explicit reference to the states in question was made in a joking manner, the line of logic most certainly applies to Obama’s decision regarding the two (now four) states where marijuana is legal recreationally, as they are in violation of the Controlled Substances Act. This was reflected in the media coverage of the remark, which was universally that Cruz had attacked Obama’s allowing of Washington and Colorado to enforce their own drug laws. Cruz made similar remarks in an interview with Reason Magazine, where Cruz called Obama’s refusal to enforce marijuana laws “dangerous to liberty”, and demanded that he go to congress instead of deciding to refuse to enforce the law. He claimed Obama’s approach to drug policy is to “announce that they will stop enforcing certain drug laws”, and said that was a “very dangerous precedent”.

2. Background Checks On Guns

While flip flopping on marijuana may strike some as a relatively minor and even predictable issue for somebody trying to bridge the gap between libertarians and conservatives, an issue where many may be shocked to find Cruz flip flopping is gun control. Though he threatened to filibuster any bill that strengthens federal background checks on the Senate Floor, in a Fox News Sunday interview he expressed a desire to improve the quality of the federal database by tightening loopholes surrounding localities not reporting mental health problems and criminal convictions. This stands in direct contrast to his pledge to vote against any expansion of gun control.

3. TPA

Trade Promotion Authority became a major topic in the Fall of 2015 and conservatives across the country reacted in disgust at the notion that we would grant Barack Obama exclusive powers over the trade agreement process. One of the people who was opposing conservatives on the issue was Ted Cruz, writing an Op-Ed alongside future house speaker Paul Ryan in support of the agreement. After seeing the outcry among grassroots conservatives across the country, however, Cruz quickly reversed his position, siding with conservatives against the President’s power. This flip flop is probably the most blatant on the list both in its clarity and appearance of political calculation, and it should cause all conservatives to question Cruz’s view of executive power.

4. Birthright Citizenship

Senator Cruz has come out against birthright citizenship in this campaign, arguing that it does not make sense on a policy level and that on a constitutional level it is questionable. As Megyn Kelly points out in the video below, this is a total reversal of his 2011 stance in favor of birthright citizenship. In 2011 Cruz stated that birthright citizenship was protected by the Constitution and the arguments against it were not very good. When confronted by Megyn Kelly on this blatant flip flop, Cruz avoided the issue. I have also included the clip of Cruz’s 2011 statement in its entirety.

5. Agriculture & Flood Insurance

Ted Cruz has often railed against government subsidies, and even hit rival Marco Rubio over his support of sugar subsidies during the Fox Business debate, but when his political interests are tied to subsidies he changes his tune. Cruz has been on the record both on the campaign trail and in Senate votes supporting agricultural insurance, arguing that there is a legitimate federal role in providing agriculture insurance. He has also voted in favor of national flood insurance, a program which disproportionately aids his coastal state. Cruz has certainly demonstrated a willingness to compromise his principles for political gain in the area of government subsidies.

6. Abolishing the TSA

When Ted Cruz ran for Senate one of the issues he ran on was abolishing the TSA. Cruz attracted libertarian support with this issue and used it very effectively to recruit Young Americans for Liberty activists to help his campaign. Unfortunately, Senator Cruz released his list of government agencies to eliminate, and the TSA was not on the list. Cruz’s campaign manager is also a co-founder of the Chertoff group, a group which profited from TSA body scanners, drawing questions as to his sincerity on this issue.

7. Government Stimulus

Ted Cruz has positioned himself as a vocal opponent of government waste, and a Republican who would not participate in bailouts. While representing the Texas Retired Teachers Association, Cruz argued that the one time payment from the stimulus program “will directly impact the economy in both the metropolitan and rural areas of Texas, and will directly further the greater purpose of economic recovery for America”. Though some will argue that his role as the attorney of this group mandated he argue on their behalf, a principled conservative would refuse to argue such a case, as it is directly contrary to their values. Cruz’s argument is disturbing coming from a man who wants to be commander in chief.

8. No Child Left Behind

Ted Cruz has positioned himself as a vocal opponent of Common Core, stating that education should be returned to states and localities. He has even stated he would support allowing school districts to opt out of No Child Left Behind. But in his essay, “The Rise Of Opportunity Conservatism”, Cruz wrote that “Some critics have objected to the increased federal money going to education, but the bill also requires testing of every child in third and eighth grades and requires schools to provide parents with detailed report cards of the school’s performance. . . . The focus is on accountability and results.”. In this essay, where Cruz also defended Bush as a very conservative president despite his spending record, the Bush insider turned presidential candidate outlines his affection for Bush’s “Opportunity conservatism” that would spawn the tea party due to its disregard for limits on big government.

9. John Roberts

Ted Cruz has taken a position as a staunch opponent of John Roberts in this campaign, even calling for his resignation over the Obamacare ruling. That being said, Cruz was a vocal supporter of John Roberts for many years, calling him a principled conservative and one of the most talented lawyers in the country. This manifested in an exchange where Jeb Bush managed to get the better of Cruz, calling him out for his support of John Roberts and exposing his flip flop.

10. HB1 Visas

Ted Cruz was a vocal supporter of expanding HB1 visas as recently as 2013, advocating for the expansion of these visas by 500%. He has argued for the expansion of these visas both on the Senate floor and in the media, but under pressure from Donald Trump for the votes of anti immigration Republicans, Cruz has now proposed that we suspend the program and investigate it for abuse. He says there is “report after report after report of big companies abusing the HB1 program”. His 180 on this issue is a direct result of the rise of Donald Trump, which seems to have made most of the Republican candidates go a little crazy.

http://www.libertyconservatives.com/ted-cruzs-biggest-flip-flops/

In a recent post I made in another thread--I pointed out how the media will blast any other candidate that gets the nomination instead of Trump=---they all have skeletons.
None are without blemish and past negatives!
Yet many still cry how bad they will blast Trump if he gets the Republican nomination as if they would take it easy on another candidate if would we chose a different one!!!
They will go full bore in an all out destroy mode on any candidate we choose.. -Tyr

[DLT]

Look in the mirror? What the fuck are you rambling about now? Who even mentioned Trump? Undoubtedly, there are many times you just reply without reading or thinking.

Uh......

YOU did.


If Trumps changing stances will harm him...

Nice anti-Cruz hit piece, btw.

No ceegar.

[Gunny]

But thanks for proving my point, that some want to spend time non-stop obsessing over Trump but are afraid to point out flip flops and such about others. Seems to me like it's YOU who can't handle it.

You proved your own point. I'm the one that's rambling? I ain't got 10000 fucking Trump threads all over the damned place. Some of us that are still normal and aren't fanboy's of that idiot would like to discuss something else. Instead of every damned thread in the top 10 is about donald duck and his lies you want to believe. He ain't going to do shit and anyone that thinks he can has missed out on politics in America the past 40 years.

And the one thing you ought to know by now is I ain't shutting up. I'd rather talk about turnips and I can't stand one bite of them. You want to enable a POS, go right the fuck ahead. Don't expect those of us that can see past tomorrow's debate to agree.

What you aren't getting here is that most of us on the bubble who would otherwise go out and vote? You're turning us the fuck off. Trump is a bully and a punk and I'm sick of hearing about the POS. If ANYTHING will keep ME from voting? It's listening to what a great guy the SOB is. There's NOTHING great about him. He's just another Obama. Rock Star with a different flavor. But it's all the same shit when it hits your mouth. Kinda tastes the same no matter who is spewing it.

You can vote for whoever your want. I respect your right to. I served so you could have that right. I also served for my right to tell you you're fucking wrong. I've explained in more threads I can start exactly what I think about his meglomanical, ass. There's no secret here. So quit telling me in every other thread I don't explain shit. He wants the one prize he doesn't have and if you can't read anyone better than that, I feel sorry for you. He's telling everyone what they want to hear to get a vote and there's NO substance behind a damned thing he says.

And you know what sucks the most to me? I'm right. Some solace I get to put up with loserboy for 4 years. I feel just great about it.

Maybe we ought to consider picking someone worth a f*ck, huh? Novel idea, I know. I don't want the worst loser. I want someone that is going to actually take us back to who and what we are.

[Gunny]

And I got news for you. It ain't the left that is going to be bitching when he can't do a thing. They're going to sit in their little world smuggly going I told you so and we get a Dem in 2020. I want to win the war, not a battle.

And her's the deal. You agree with tyr. I do too. But I want to do it right, and I want to do it once. Since I'm the military idiot around here how about we agree with my fucking plan?

[Perianne]

And I got news for you. It ain't the left that is going to be bitching when he can't do a thing. They're going to sit in their little world smuggly going I told you so and we get a Dem in 2020. I want to win the war, not a battle.

So, Gunny, do you like Trump or not? It's not really clear. :)

[jimnyc]

I ain't got 10000 fucking Trump threads all over the damned place. Some of us that are still normal and aren't fanboy's of that idiot would like to discuss something else.

It's not my fault you are too stupid to open threads you have no interest in. It's not my fault you are not intelligent enough to start threads about things that will in fact interest you. Are you not capable of doing either one?

[jimnyc]

Uh......

YOU did.



Nice anti-Cruz hit piece, btw.

No ceegar.

Call it what you like, I call it the FACTS. Deal with 'em.

[jimnyc]

I spent a great deal of time both yesterday, and then again this morning, reading up on the supposed lies that Ted Cruz has made over the years. This IS a problem, as many of these lies are true. Trustworthy and honesty will be an issue with this election. I saw the other day that the majority of Dems in Michigan didn't trust Hillary. No way in hell he's even remotely in the same universe as that witch, but lies nonetheless.

[jimnyc]

Some more to ponder... A bit dated, as he entered the race...

-----

The Cruz File

A 30-second video announcing Cruz’s candidacy for president begins, “It’s a time for truth.” Here at FactCheck.org, we couldn’t agree more.

But as our archives show, Cruz is no stranger to FactCheck.org’s pages. We have checked more than a dozen dubious claims Cruz has made since entering the Senate in January 2013. And as we will do for all of the politicians who get into the presidential race, we’ll highlight some of the misleading claims that we have examined.

Immigration Claims

Cruz voted against and has been a vocal critic of a Senate-passed immigration bill, S. 744, which has stalled in the House. After a series of border security measures are met, the bill would have allowed a pathway to citizenship for immigrants living in the U.S. illegally since at least Dec. 31, 2011. The earned path to citizenship included paying fines and back taxes, proving gainful employment, completing background checks, learning English and civics, and going to the back of the line of prospective immigrants. Cruz has called any path to citizenship “amnesty.”

Cruz claimed in November that the 2014 midterm elections were “a referendum on amnesty” and voters had sent a clear message opposing it. But Cruz was wrong. Election voters, by a margin of 57 percent to 39 percent, said those living in the U.S. illegally but working should be offered a chance to gain legal status, according to exit polling.
Cruz has regularly drawn applause in recent speeches for his suggestion to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and put “every one of those 110,000 [IRS] agents … on our southern border.” But, as we have written, the IRS has nowhere near 110,000 employees, let alone that many agents. The number of IRS employees has been on the decline, and currently stands at about 82,000. Less than a quarter of them are revenue agents, special agents or revenue officers.
On July 21, 2013, Cruz warned that if the Senate immigration bill became law, there will be “20 or 30 million” people living in the U.S. illegally “in another 10, 20 years.” That’s his opinion, but we wrote that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says the bill, if enacted, will reduce future illegal immigration in 10 years by 33 percent to 50 percent compared with current law.

Health Care/Affordable Care Act

Cruz has been a staunch opponent of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, regularly calling for its full repeal, as he did in his announcement speech. But Cruz’s criticisms of the health care law have not always been on the mark.

In a press conference on Oct. 16, 2013, Cruz claimed that “families of special needs children will face a new penalty for using savings” to pay for medical expenses. He was referring to a $2,500 cap on pre-tax contributions to flexible spending accounts. Actually, advocates for special needs children told us that provision hasn’t had much of an impact, and the new law “greatly benefits people with disabilities.”
In September 2013, Cruz distorted the impact of the Affordable Care Act on premiums. He claimed that the Ohio Department of Insurance announced an 88 percent average increase for the individual market. It didn’t. The department estimated a 41 percent increase on average in a press release that called for the law’s repeal.
In a TV ad, Cruz misconstrued the words of the health care law’s lead author. Claiming “there’s bipartisan agreement that Obamacare isn’t working,” Cruz said Max Baucus, a Democratic senator at the time, called the law “a huge train wreck.” But Baucus didn’t say “Obamacare isn’t working,” and he didn’t call it “a huge train wreck.” He was critical of the education and outreach efforts of the administration during implementation of the law, not the law itself.

We also dealt with a flurry of misleading claims Cruz made about the Affordable Care Act during his 21-hour talk-a-thon on the Senate floor — which started Sept. 24, 2013, and ended the following day. We tackled those claims in two separate stories. Among the misleading claims:

Cruz misrepresented union opposition to the health care law. Cruz claimed unions, including the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, want to “repeal” the health care law “because it is a nightmare.” Three unions used the word “nightmare” in a letter to Democratic leaders in Congress. But they asked that the law be fixed, not repealed.
Cruz falsely claimed that the spouses of 15,000 UPS employees will be “left without health insurance” and forced into “an exchange with no employer subsidy.” UPS announced it was dropping coverage for spouses, but only if they can get insurance with their own employer.
Cruz repeated the false claim that members of Congress are exempt from the health care law. As we have written numerous times, the law requires congressional members and their staffs to get insurance through the newly created exchanges, so they are not exempt. In fact, the law prevents them from getting insurance through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, like other federal employees. However, the federal government will continue to make contributions toward the premiums of lawmakers and their staffs — just as most large employers do for their employees.

Miscellaneous

In a recent critique of NASA spending on earth and atmospheric sciences, Cruz claimed there has been a “disproportionate increase” since 2009 in funding of earth sciences. There has been an increase, but spending on earth sciences is lower now as a percentage of NASA’s budget than it was in fiscal 2000. And the increase reflects an effort to restore funding that had been cut. Cruz also suggested that NASA’s “core mission” does not include earth sciences. In fact, studying the Earth and atmosphere has been central to NASA’s mission since its creation in 1958.

In a video response to President Obama’s State of the Union address in January, Cruz claimed that “not a word was said about radical Islamic terrorism.” Obama didn’t use the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism,” but he vowed to combat “violent extremism” and asked for congressional authority to use force against the Islamic State. Cruz also said Obama “could not bring himself even to bring” up the president’s executive action on immigration. But he did. Obama said he would veto legislation that attempts to undo it.

Cruz condemned Obama’s announcement that he would normalize relations with Cuba, calling the communist country “a leading state sponsor of terrorism.” That’s a stretch, to say the least. While Cuba – along with Iran, Syria and Sudan — is listed by the State Department as one of four “State Sponsors of Terrorism,” the department’s annual Country Report on Terrorism, published in April, provided little evidence of Cuba sponsoring terrorism, especially compared with the extensive portfolio of the others on that list.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/23/ted-cruz-fact-check_n_6927516.html

[Gunny]

I spent a great deal of time both yesterday, and then again this morning, reading up on the supposed lies that Ted Cruz has made over the years. This IS a problem, as many of these lies are true. Trustworthy and honesty will be an issue with this election. I saw the other day that the majority of Dems in Michigan didn't trust Hillary. No way in hell he's even remotely in the same universe as that witch, but lies nonetheless.

So, the question is, if Trump changes stances is he okay but if Cruz does he's a liar? Hmmm .. wonder how THAT works ....

I have no problem with people changing their stances. It's called growing a brain. Next comes credibility. And I admit to bias. I've dealt with real estate developers for years. They'll try and convince you your mother is a guy to make a buck/get what they want.

I was never part of that "flip-flop" crap Jillian ran into the mud. How you can be a lawyer and be as blind and dumb as her beats the crap out of me. I'll change my mind based on new information if I damned well want to. To me, that makes me intelligent and open to new ideas, not a "flip-flopper".

Trump's problem with me is NOT changing his mind. His problem is I know his ilk and he's saying whatever he needs to say to win. Actually being President of the US and leading us is secondary to his having to win. I used to work for officers like that. The medal was more important than the win. He's so obvious it's ridiculous.

[jimnyc]

So, the question is, if Trump changes stances is he okay but if Cruz does he's a liar? Hmmm .. wonder how THAT works ....

I have no problem with people changing their stances. It's called growing a brain. Next comes credibility. And I admit to bias. I've dealt with real estate developers for years. They'll try and convince you your mother is a guy to make a buck/get what they want.

I was never part of that "flip-flop" crap Jillian ran into the mud. How you can be a lawyer and be as blind and dumb as her beats the crap out of me. I'll change my mind based on new information if I damned well want to. To me, that makes me intelligent and open to new ideas, not a "flip-flopper".

Trump's problem with me is NOT changing his mind. His problem is I know his ilk and he's saying whatever he needs to say to win. Actually being President of the US and leading us is secondary to his having to win. I used to work for officers like that. The medal was more important than the win. He's so obvious it's ridiculous.

In one post you fucking whine about the amount of Trump threads. So I change the subject so that we can discuss other candidates and similar issues - and you change the topic back to Trump.

Please then - PLEASE save your whining in the other threads about the amount of Trump threads and Trump discussions.

[Kathianne]

So, the question is, if Trump changes stances is he okay but if Cruz does he's a liar? Hmmm .. wonder how THAT works ....

I have no problem with people changing their stances. It's called growing a brain. Next comes credibility. And I admit to bias. I've dealt with real estate developers for years. They'll try and convince you your mother is a guy to make a buck/get what they want.

I was never part of that "flip-flop" crap Jillian ran into the mud. How you can be a lawyer and be as blind and dumb as her beats the crap out of me. I'll change my mind based on new information if I damned well want to. To me, that makes me intelligent and open to new ideas, not a "flip-flopper".

Trump's problem with me is NOT changing his mind. His problem is I know his ilk and he's saying whatever he needs to say to win. Actually being President of the US and leading us is secondary to his having to win. I used to work for officers like that. The medal was more important than the win. He's so obvious it's ridiculous.

Which has been my response to questions whether 'changing on issues' isn't ok. I mean 'even Reagan,' right?

I look at if they've put through some thought to why they changed. With 'the Gang of 8' Rubio hasn't really changed his mind, has he? Nope, he has said that the 'reality of where the people are, after promises had been made repeated and broken just as often, that first came provable and believed secure border-then they might consider reform.'

I'll even take compromise on some issues, something now called 'flexibility' it seems.

My problem with Trump is sheer numbers combined with lack of reasoning for changes. Then there's just the fact that he goes back and forth, within days; sometimes within a paragraph.

Unlike Jim, I've not researched all the charges he cited regarding Cruz. On the marijuana one though, my first thought was he was consistently staying with keeping the decision on state level, same as alcohol, abortion, tobacco, etc. Maybe that was incorrect?

[Olivia]

So, we got up a little cranky this morning huh?


I don't like Trump, Rubio is losing and now Cruz is an idiot. What do we do now? Is it true? Is the Republican Party done?

[jimnyc]

So, we got up a little cranky this morning huh?


I don't like Trump, Rubio is losing and now Cruz is an idiot. What do we do now? Is it true? Is the Republican Party done?

Who's cranky? Me, for posting an article? LOL

Who said Cruz was an idiot?

[Kathianne]

So, we got up a little cranky this morning huh?


I don't like Trump, Rubio is losing and now Cruz is an idiot. What do we do now? Is it true? Is the Republican Party done?

Nah, Cruz is solidly in second and Trump's supporters are now listing everything they can find, no surprise. While some folks were upset with those of us that did the same with Trump, we were doing it at the front of the process, not the end.

If there's real 'damage causes there,' little time to go hunting for the information-if so inclined.

[jimnyc]

Nah, Cruz is solidly in second and Trump's supporters are now listing everything they can find, no surprise. While some folks were upset with those of us that did the same with Trump, we were doing it at the front of the process, not the end.

If there's real 'damage causes there,' little time to go hunting for the information-if so inclined.

Huh? So now there's something wrong with posting articles about Cruz, because I didn't somehow do so in the beginning?

You guys whine and whine about Trump, and then whine more when anyone else is discussed.

Like I said awhile back, the hatred OOZES out and you guys take it out on the member posting. Look at how you guys post, just because I posted a few things about Cruz. Rather telling indeed, when "friends" are treated as such, for simply posting a few things negative about Cruz.

Point proven. You guys will whine and bitch no matter what. The hatred has taken over, and it changes the thinking process, and now anyone who supports or mentions Trump is somehow the enemy. Whatever, I honestly don't give a fuck. SAVE IT then, just simply ignore any of my threads if you guys are unable to handle it, that simple.

[Kathianne]

Huh? So now there's something wrong with posting articles about Cruz, because I didn't somehow do so in the beginning?

You guys whine and whine about Trump, and then whine more when anyone else is discussed.

Like I said awhile back, the hatred OOZES out and you guys take it out on the member posting. Look at how you guys post, just because I posted a few things about Cruz. Rather telling indeed, when "friends" are treated as such, for simply posting a few things negative about Cruz.

Point proven. You guys will whine and bitch no matter what. The hatred has taken over, and it changes the thinking process, and now anyone who supports or mentions Trump is somehow the enemy. Whatever, I honestly don't give a fuck. SAVE IT then, just simply ignore any of my threads if you guys are unable to handle it, that simple.

Nope, I'll be consistent. I think it's very good for our process to know the good and bad regarding candidates before making our choices. The stuff with Cruz would take time away from what I'm now interested in doing, which is watching where the election process is going.

What I was saying is that what you and many others are now doing with Cruz is little different than what you were complaining about in the past.

I prefer to find out what I can about the candidates when I find myself first attracted or repelled by them and their positions or lack thereof. What is left to find out about Trump is likely so detailed that none of us would bother, if we even understood whatever was found. Instead we are going to be treated to 'guilt by association' with him, something that holds little weight with me. I made that clear on 'long summer thread.'

[jimnyc]

IMO, you guys have been consistently hateful towards anyone who likes Trump. To this very minute, I STILL have not seen any proof that anyone has ever attacked anyone for supporting any other candidate - which are in fact accusations that were leveled. But Trump? Hell, the board turned into a Trump board because 99% of the threads stayed Trump and extremely little attention was paid to the other candidates, even from those who hate Trump. The hatred made many blind to the other candidates.

But if you like Trump, you will consistently be belittled and have your intelligence called into question, and generally just nothing but condescension coming from those who hate Trump.

I told Tyr and LTG privately that the haters couldn't go a couple of threads without resorting back to Trump, that the hatred was more important. I stated that if I posted things about Cruz, similar to what is being posted about Trump, that I would be treated condescendinlgy for doing so. I further told them in advance that I had NO issue with Cruz, have liked him since the beginning. But I was correct on both counts, and it took less threads than I thought it would.

Some will be willing to toss friendships out the window, simply because the other person prefers a different candidate. Whatever. Unfortunately I was correct about that one too.

[jimnyc]

For anyone else thinking of responding here, just an Fyi, I'm done in this thread and won't be responding anymore.

[Kathianne]

For anyone else thinking of responding here, just an Fyi, I'm done in this thread and won't be responding anymore.

I guess Jim won't see this, but to his point,

Well I haven't defriended anyone because of their opinions for or against Trump, Cruz, Walker, etc. The reason I'm here is to discuss issues and sometimes argue and try to convince or less common, change my mind. I didn't have to resort to pm'ing with Gunny or anyone else to try to find out how to change anyone's minds or come up with a way to ignore any of their posts on any candidate. I do seek out information and opinions on the candidates-I don't know any of them personally. While anyone here, myself included, can get in a snit for whatever reason, I don't find the bulk of the members 'stupid' or 'ill-informed,' if I did, I wouldn't be here.

The most consistent arguments I've seen here regarding Trump is 'too tear down' pretty much anything. We're angry and he 'tells it like it is.' Ok then. I didn't change my mind. I'm not big on throwing out the Constitution, reinstating a king or equivalent. Those things I know.

If what I've posted in the past, currently, recently, years ago, or in the future makes someone not 'like me', I'll just have to live with that. Their liking me or not hasn't changed how I feel towards them or their choice in whom to vote for or even which party or non-party.

If somehow my posts or the few others that didn't jump to get with Trump caused the other 99% to join, well then. :smoke: I'll not be blamed for Trump winning.

[tailfins]

But thanks for proving my point, that some want to spend time non-stop obsessing over Trump but are afraid to point out flip flops and such about others. Seems to me like it's YOU who can't handle it.

What I can't handle is the GOP nominating a candidate that will likely put Hillary in the White House and if by some fluke he is elected will use the conservative movement as a bargaining chip, thus marginalizing the conservative movement. From the left's perspective that's a win-win. Or if you're from a Vietnamese family, a Nguyen-Nguyen (same pronunciation as win).

[Gunny]

It's not my fault you are too stupid to open threads you have no interest in. It's not my fault you are not intelligent enough to start threads about things that will in fact interest you. Are you not capable of doing either one?

*

[Black Diamond]

What I can't handle is the GOP nominating a candidate that will likely put Hillary in the White House .

Then tell Willard to shut up and stay out.

[LongTermGuy]

And Trump was a Dem and gave money to Billary. Don't look in the mirror if the picture's too rough.

...Damn Gunny is that all ya got...? Get caught up...Did you miss my other posts on this topic?

​sigh ...OK..When Trump was a business man...he gave money to all...he "manipulated" them all..Dems and the Repubs.....

...he went to their weddings...baby showers..smiled when he had to...gave money...etc...all part of the "ART OF THE DEAL"...*he got things passes...approved..he controlled them...he knew they were WEAK...he pulled their strings

*In business one caint be just one way...otherwise one goes broke and goes home a loser...


Trump was an old School Democrat like Reagon was...until the change to Republican...Like Reagon...Old School Democrats from yesterday are `nothing` like the DemoCrap Rats of today...Everything has changed...

*Again Trump does not need to do this..need the >>> ehhh... "Job" or the money
*Trump depends on no one or their Money...(like the others do)...There is always strings attached with free money given to run a Campaign...

Trump can communicate with all...... all people from races... "from all parties"..Genders etc..

Trump is a "smart" Conservative.....People like the ideas ...of him being tough on ...Tax payer money sucking Illegals (and their eggs)...muslim koran reading roaches...making our Military stronger...taking care of our Vets...Supporting our Police force and giving them the power to `act` without "PC" recourse...Trump has a pen too! A Golden one...which will and can dismantle all of Obamas damage...and so much more...

Ok buddy..carry on...:cool:

[Olivia]

I did not mean to come across as hateful. I just wondered about Cruz being such a flip flop. Trump is out for me, Rubio hasn't a snowballs chance in hell, and now Cruz is a flip flop which equates to dishonest in my book and the exact reason I dislike Trump. I really do think the Republican Party is about to break apart. Now, Trump is calling for " unity" after he calls everyone every name in the book. Wow! What a guy. The convention will be a make it or break it deal for the Republican Party.

[Black Diamond]

I did not mean to come across as hateful. I just wondered about Cruz being such a flip flop. Trump is out for me, Rubio hasn't a snowballs chance in hell, and now Cruz is a flip flop which equates to dishonest in my book and the exact reason I dislike Trump. I really do think the Republican Party is about to break apart. Now, Trump is calling for " unity" after he calls everyone every name in the book. Wow! What a guy. The convention will be a make it or break it deal for the Republican Party.

My dad voted for Carson in spite of the fact he had already suspended his campaign (shrug).

[Gunny]

I did not mean to come across as hateful. I just wondered about Cruz being such a flip flop. Trump is out for me, Rubio hasn't a snowballs chance in hell, and now Cruz is a flip flop which equates to dishonest in my book and the exact reason I dislike Trump. I really do think the Republican Party is about to break apart. Now, Trump is calling for " unity" after he calls everyone every name in the book. Wow! What a guy. The convention will be a make it or break it deal for the Republican Party.

Nobody's trying to come across as hateful. I'm not. I don't think anyone else intentionally is. But when you let your emotions rules your world, you react. I love you people that have emotions. You're funny as hell to me. At the same time, I'm kinda jealous. I have none. Some people are butthurt over it, but just get over it. I'm exactly what you and your society made me. I DON'T CARE. You made us that way. Try fixing something instead of criticizing it.

And I'm not trying to be mean. I'm not a mean person. I just don't understand people who can't think without emotion. But when some quit doing it we might get a President with a brain.

In the meantime, we can all react emotionally to a big mouthed bully. Guess for all our talk we hit 1st grade for the second go round.

[tailfins]

Nobody's trying to come across as hateful. I'm not. I don't think anyone else intentionally is. But when you let your emotions rules your world, you react. I love you people that have emotions. You're funny as hell to me. At the same time, I'm kinda jealous. I have none. Some people are butthurt over it, but just get over it. I'm exactly what you and your society made me. I DON'T CARE. You made us that way. Try fixing something instead of criticizing it.

And I'm not trying to be mean. I'm not a mean person. I just don't understand people who can't think without emotion. But when some quit doing it we might get a President with a brain.

In the meantime, we can all react emotionally to a big mouthed bully. Guess for all our talk we hit 1st grade for the second go round.

We're you born that way or become that way? I seem to generate lots of hostility by trying to learn what it might be like to be emotionally charged. Oh well.

[Gunny]

We're you born that way or become that way? I seem to generate lots of hostility by trying to learn what it might be like to be emotionally charged. Oh well.

I don't know what "being born that way" means. I was a recruit from Day 1. Used to blame my father, the son of an Army SgtMaj until I figured out it was all he knew. So I'd say it's environmental. I watch civilians now and I'm like what a bunch of undisciplined, selfish rabble. I honestly do not and have not understood civilians. It's all about YOU. That is completely 360 from those of us that were raised to serve a higher cause. We weren't raised to serve ourselves.

You get in trouble with people because you DO care, and it's obvious, and you let it be known. Not to mention some might not get your sense of humor.