Wednesday, November 25, 2015
The Weaknesses Of Cruz And Carson
Two recent posts at National Review are good at summing up some of the biggest weaknesses of Ted Cruz and Ben Carson. And notice the irrational responses by supporters of Cruz, Carson, and Trump in the comments sections of both threads. They unwittingly underscore the point that Rubio should be the nominee. As you hear from Rubio's critics in online forums, on talk radio, etc., keep in mind that he has a 94% rating from the Heritage Foundation and 98% from the American Conservative Union.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I completely understand why Ben Carson is a weak candidate. He seems to be a decent guy and all, but while being an outsider can be appealing, it also reveals his lack of experience.
ReplyDeleteThe article that you linked to about Cruz states that his weakness is basically too conservative. Other than that it doesn't list anything that I believe is a true weakness. Can you elaborate Jason?
Speaking for myself, I'd say one of Cruz's major obstacles is (rightly or wrongly) image. He just doesn't come off as very likeable or sincere, which in turn will impact his electability. He comes off more as devious and cunning. Something along those lines. I'm not saying he is at heart devious, etc., but that's just how he appears in public. Perhaps he can overcome this image somehow, but at the moment it's an important factor to take into consideration.
DeleteIn addition, Cruz is largely despised by the establishment. Yet I presume he'll need their support if he wants to win the presidency.
zipper778,
DeleteElectability is important, and the post I linked addresses Cruz's electability. We don't vote alone. We vote with other people. You have to take into account how other people are likely to vote. Otherwise, why not just write in the name of an uncle you agree with on the issues or run for office yourself? Everybody or almost everybody takes electability into account, even people who act as if they don't. If candidate A has a 90% chance of getting elected and giving you 75% of what you want, while candidate B has a 5% chance of getting elected and giving you 100% of what you want, it makes no sense to ignore their chances of getting elected, as if what they'd give you if elected is all that matters. The reasoning behind taking electability into account is the same sort of reasoning all of us accept in many other contexts in life.
Cruz would be better than Rubio in some ways, but Rubio has better electability. Consider how ignorant and undiscerning the American people have shown themselves to be. About fifteen percent of voters in 2012 said that Hurricane Sandy was the biggest factor in determining who they voted for in the presidential race. A majority of Americans can't name the three branches of government. More than forty percent can't name the current vice president. A majority can't name the four gospels. Obama was elected twice. Most Americans think same-sex marriage is acceptable and don't have much or any objection to transgenderism. Etc. In a nation that corrupt, we should be glad to have such a good chance of electing somebody as conservative as Rubio. He's more conservative than Ronald Reagan. Yet, there are so many Trump supporters, Cruz supporters, etc. who act as if Rubio is a RINO, part of "the establishment" (which they view in a highly negative way), no better than Hillary Clinton, etc. I've seen some say that they won't vote if Rubio is the nominee.
The biggest problem with Cruz's candidacy isn't Cruz. It's the voters. He has a significant electability problem, and it's largely not his fault. See my recent Facebook post here for more of an explanation. If you log on to Facebook, you can also see the discussion that followed in the comments section.