PDA

View Full Version : Ted Cruz wins TX Senate Primary


hoffmang
07-31-2012, 7:25 PM
Ted Cruz has won the Senate Primary in Texas which makes him a virtual shoo-in in the general election to be the Junior Senator from Texas this fall.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/ted-cruz-wins-republican-runoff-for-texas-senate-seat/2012/07/31/gJQADsLtNX_blog.html

Why is this 2A related?

Though most every Texas Senator is A or A+ rated by NRA, Ted Cruz has been instrumental in support of the Heller and McDonald decisions - often working closely with Alan Gura and pulling together the excellent AG/States briefs - Heller amicus (http://www.gurapossessky.com/news/parker/documents/07-290bsacTexas.pdf). Here (http://www.nra.org/Article.aspx?id=15654) he is winning the Carter Knight Freedom Fund Award award from NRA. Future Senator Cruz even posted the photo of Alan Gottlieb holding up the attorneys fees check from Chicago on his Senate Campaign website (http://www.tedcruz.org/blog/2012/02/08/rahm-pays-for-violating-second-amendment/).

Is there such a thing as an A++ rating for a Senator?

-Gene

stix213
07-31-2012, 7:27 PM
I think my $50 donation to his campaign put him over the top ;)

Glad to see he pulled it off in the end with so much Republican establisment opposition.

sholling
07-31-2012, 10:10 PM
So much for the TEA Party being dead :p. The slow but steady takeover of the Republican Party rolls on and much to the frustration of the naysayers they aren't letting themselves gets co-opted into big spending establishment.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/31/Boom-Ted-Cruz-Wins-Texas-Senate-Runoff

Edit: National Review on how Cruz won in the face of the establishment support and big money of his rival.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/312833/why-cruz-won-katrina-trinko
So why did Cruz win? Well, one significant change: the percentage of tea-party voters he was attracting. A late May PPP poll, taken before the first round of the primary, showed that 38 percent of Tea Partiers backed Cruz, while 39 percent backed Dewhurst. But in PPP’s poll from this past weekend, that dynamic had changed significantly, with Cruz now getting 75 percent of tea partiers and Dewhurst winning only 22 percent.

mag360
07-31-2012, 11:41 PM
Bless those Texans!

mosinnagantm9130
07-31-2012, 11:53 PM
:thumbsup:

I heard him speak on Hannity the other night, seemed like a good guy.

Gray Peterson
07-31-2012, 11:59 PM
David Dewhurst had a lot to do with the killing of good pro-gun bills in the Texas Legislature.

BroncoBob
08-01-2012, 6:35 AM
Why can't we get someone like Ted Cruz in CA?

jrock
08-01-2012, 8:32 AM
i saw that this am! outstanding news.
i may be a transplant texan someday soon.
gotta keep the pressure on progressive republicans w\conservative\libertarian tea party reformers. he and most like him are anti-career politician types.

Uxi
08-01-2012, 8:37 AM
Sounds like maybe A+ are given too freely if Cruz is above and beyond that.

live2suck
08-01-2012, 8:43 AM
David Dewhurst had a lot to do with the killing of good pro-liberty bills in the Texas Legislature.

Fixed it for you.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/politics/texas_legislature/article/Patrick-blames-Dewhurst-for-death-of-1396220.php?referer=twitter

ja308
08-01-2012, 8:47 AM
Glad I contributed to the tea party . Ted Cruz will be a welcome addition to the US senate .

The answer to the question . "why cant we get candidiates like that in california?
We do , Carly fiorina was as good as candidates get .
Why did she lose?
Stupid democrats.
Even dumber libertarians .
A major media that is able to wrap simple peoples thoughts around their agenda!

451040
08-01-2012, 1:21 PM
WIN!

mag360
08-01-2012, 1:38 PM
Glad I contributed to the tea party . Ted Cruz will be a welcome addition to the US senate .

The answer to the question . "why cant we get candidiates like that in california?
We do , Carly fiorina was as good as candidates get .
Why did she lose?
Stupid democrats.
Even dumber libertarians .
A major media that is able to wrap simple peoples thoughts around their agenda!

Carly lost because she opened her mouth on abortion that was completely opposite of what the majority of CA wants and she did not support marriage equality.

Uxi
08-01-2012, 1:42 PM
Carly lost because she opened her mouth on abortion that was completely opposite of what the majority of CA wants and she did not support marriage equality.

lol sure. Fiorina was not a conservative, though many moderates and leftists want to pretend she was based on a single issue. Whitman was for abortion, yet did that help her? Leftists aren't going to vote for either and California simply has more consumers than producers voting since the latter have been fleeing for a decade.

bwiese
08-01-2012, 2:00 PM
The answer to the question . "why cant we get candidiates like that in california?
We do , Carly fiorina was as good as candidates get .
Why did she lose?


Because she opened her mouth about "pro life" crap in a state heavily tilted toward pro-choice,
given metro & single female demographic spikes. Women are often single-issue voters on this
issue and there's enough carry-thru on men voting on this issue to that it's 100% losing for CA
statewide elections.

Pro-life types simply can't win in CA. [See: Dan Lungren] - perhaps outside of OC or "the sticks".

In fact everytime Carly opened her mouth about pro-life crap, her polls went down - there was a
direct and immediate correlation. If she'd STFUd she'd have beaten Boxer, who was already a
weak candidate without anywhere near the strength or respect Dianne Feinstein has garnered
from middle-ground/swing voters.

In CA elections, "pro-life" ==> antigun & pro-tax-increase results.

bulgron
08-01-2012, 2:12 PM
In CA elections, "pro-life" ==> antigun & pro-tax-increase results.

Can a "pro-life" candidate even make it onto the ballot for a general election anymore in California? I mean, my expectation is that mostly we're just going to see two Democrats running against each other for the big, state-wide offices from now on. And thus is the Republican party dead and buried in this state.

As long as Republicans stand on principle and run their mouth about abortion, they're only going to lose and lose and lose.

What needs to happen is for the current leadership in the CA republican party to get kicked to the curb in favor of people who can understand that there are political issues -- winning political issues -- beyond abortion that a candidate can talk about.

Bottom line, if you aren't pro-choice and you want to get somewhere in CA politics, keep it to yourself.

bwiese
08-01-2012, 2:19 PM
Can a "pro-life" candidate even make it onto the ballot for a general election anymore in California?

Probably not. Which is why even a Whig has more chance of winning a statewide office or most metro-area legislative seats.


I mean, my expectation is that mostly we're just going to see two Democrats running against each other for the big, state-wide offices from now on. And thus is the Republican party dead and buried in this state.


Reeps will hold rural/lower population areas and certain rich enclaves with an older demographic. But as the metro-vs.sticks population skew increases, they're gonna go under 1/3 or be very riskily close. The other real problem is the population is getting younger in CA and Old White Guys [Wanting To Manage Vaginas] just don't win many elections here.

As long as Republicans stand on principle and run their mouth about abortion, they're only going to lose and lose and lose.

Yes. But this is also because the donor base PAYS FOR LOSING.


What needs to happen is for the current leadership in the CA republican party to get kicked to the curb in favor of people who can understand that there are political issues -- winning political issues -- beyond abortion that a candidate can talk about.

Yup. Again, campaigns and party management and consultants are all PAID TO LOSE. It's political Darwinian antimatter.


Bottom line, if you aren't pro-choice and you want to get somewhere in CA politics, keep it to yourself.

Yup. But you hear Reep party management talking after each successive loss, "Omigod, people don't understand us, we have to become 'more conservative' [read: more religious conservative] and yell it out to win the next election..." I suggest the CA Reep party management should undergo autism-spectrum tests, given that their views simply are 100% nonconsonant with political reality so much so that it reveals lack of normal brain function.

bulgron
08-01-2012, 2:28 PM
they're gonna go under 1/3

I predict that they'll be under 1/3 at the end of this next election.

But Republicans will never change. So the only thing to do is:

1. Kick the idiots running the Republican party to the curb, or
2. forward pro-gun Democrats onto the ballot, or
3. move out of state, or
4. continue to use California to advance gun rights lawsuits in the federal court system while we all live through a massive economic collapse.

I tried for 3, but the wife wouldn't go along with it. So now I'm just helplessly doing 4.

bwiese
08-01-2012, 2:36 PM
I predict that they'll be under 1/3 at the end of this next election.


Not sure. There may be some anti-Obama bite-back, or just chagrined former supporters (novelty, what-have-you) that may stave this off for another election cycle.


But Republicans will never change. So the only thing to do is:

1. Kick the idiots running the Republican party to the curb, or
2. forward pro-gun Democrats onto the ballot, or
3. move out of state, or
4. continue to use California to advance gun rights lawsuits in the federal court system while we all live through a massive economic collapse.

I tried for 3, but the wife wouldn't go along with it. So now I'm just helplessly doing 4.


There will need to be generational change in the management of the CA Reep party. Tom DelBeccaro tries to look young and hip with his foppish haircut but he has to kiss *** with the donors.

And those donors are also failing because the CA GOP is now BROKE and running a huge deficit (since some of the funds are now getting vectored directly to "Friends of" accounts, etc.)

It will also require kicking some evangelicals etc to the curb; their participation must be realized as harmful now: anything they can bring is far more tainted than the benefits they could offer.

Also, even if CA *gov't* goes broke, CA itself won't go broke ;-)

bulgron
08-01-2012, 2:45 PM
Also, even if CA *gov't* goes broke, CA itself won't go broke ;-)

I'm not so sure. Once Dems have supermajorities in the legislature, plus the governor, they can do whatever they want on taxes. Since what they want is to raise taxes on America's wealthiest citizens (I'm convinced this means anyone who makes more than $70K a year), that means they'll raise taxes, and by quite a lot too.

The more they raise taxes, the more people will not be able to engage in discretionary spending. More, the people whose taxes have been raised to an unacceptable level will figure out that they need to leave California in order to have some kind of a life. So they will. I mean, they already are. But it's just going to get worse from here.

This will bring on another fiscal crises, which will cause Sacramento to raise taxes even more, because that's the only thing they know.

Rinse, lather, repeat.

Eventually you end up with a flat-lined economy. Meanwhile, more and more cops, firefighters, teachers, etc. lose their jobs.

In the end, collapse.

I think this could happen in 5 years. 10 on the outside.

The reason why this is 2A related is that as California turns into a failed state, crime rates are going to soar. I leave it as an exercise to the reader to fill in the blanks.

But the good news is that you'll be able to CCW safely without a permit. There won't be anyone out there to catch you doing it.

Welcome to the wild, wacky world of a single-party state. Enjoy the chaos while you can.

Uxi
08-01-2012, 2:49 PM
Probably not. Which is why even a Whig has more chance of winning a statewide office or most metro-area legislative seats.


Yeah? How many Whigs in the Assembly or State Senate?


Yes. But this is also because the donor base PAYS FOR LOSING.



Yup. Again, campaigns and party management and consultants are all PAID TO LOSE. It's political Darwinian antimatter.


This is sadly true. It's an organization issue, though, not ideological repudiation.



Yup. But you hear Reep party management talking after each successive loss, "Omigod, people don't understand us, we have to become 'more conservative' [read: more religious conservative] and yell it out to win the next election..." I suggest the CA Reep party management should undergo autism-spectrum tests, given that their views simply are 100% nonconsonant with political reality so much so that it reveals lack of normal brain function.

Why would they want your advice?

You're saying if they want to win they should act more like Democrats on social issues and that will somehow translate to some victory on the 2nd Amendment? That sounds like a definitive non-sequitur. The problem is moderates campaigning as conservatives and running as the lesser of two evils doesn't inspire support.

We're all tilting at windmills around here, hoping for SCOTUS to get traction against the Yee's and Portantianos. I would be willing to vote for a Whig or even Libertarian if they weren't even less irrelevent than Republicans, RINOS, or the unicorn of a conservative Democrat and could help on the RTKBA. Unfortunately none of them exist and the problem is getting worse, not better.

Ignoring the black and Latino social conservative vote that helped pass Prop 8 as much as they voted for Barry sounds even more nonsensical than appealing to their statist anti-gun amoral element.

bwiese
08-01-2012, 2:59 PM
You're saying if they want to win they should act more like Democrats on social issues and that will somehow translate to some victory on the 2nd Amendment? That sounds like a definitive non-sequitur. The problem is moderates campaigning as conservatives and running as the lesser of two evils doesn't inspire support.

There is far more 2A support - or better, lack of organized 2A opposition - than there is on pro-life/pro-choice.

A pro-choice candidate with a bag of machineguns will beat a prolifer that's antigun. Ref: Dan Lungren.

Guns are way down the list of CA voter concerns.

Yes CA Reeps should be more like Dems on most (nongun) social issues SO THEY CAN FRIGGIN' WIN and carry gunrights and basic fiscal conservatism forward.


Ignoring the black and Latino social conservative vote that helped pass Prop 8 as much as they voted for Barry sounds even more nonsensical than appealing to their statist anti-gun amoral element.

There are few black and Latino social conservatives - or rather, they may be somewhat social conservatives but they will be voting Dem anyway. Prop 8 was result of an accidental carryover due to a unique time that will not be replicated, nor would it pass today.

ptoguy2002
08-01-2012, 3:23 PM
Maybe Mr. Cruz can quietly slip in a rider someplace about, oh I don't, maybe: legalizing suppressors; maybe an end user exemption to 922r (a real simple one liner); perhaps a line about no CLEO sign off, maybe even something about "ATF shall collect taxes on........"

Legasat
08-01-2012, 3:32 PM
Very happy to see Ted win.

gunsmith
08-02-2012, 1:23 AM
national reciprocity, Ted, please!

Uxi
08-02-2012, 8:40 AM
There is far more 2A support - or better, lack of organized 2A opposition - than there is on pro-life/pro-choice.

Where? Not in the State Legislature, that's for sure! Not in the Latino / Catholic community. I'd say they're both pretty low supported with blacks.
Probably about the same in the leftist bastions in LA and the Bay...


A pro-choice candidate with a bag of machineguns will beat a prolifer that's antigun. Ref: Dan Lungren.


Either way is half a bag of crap. My contention is the Pro-Lifer with a bag of machine guns will do better than limp wristed moderate RINOs aping a few individual socially conservative positions, which does not a conservative make. Especially when they are the board of notoriously leftist organizations (Fiorina and "Vital Voices Global Partnership" comes to mind) isn't really fooling many, though you appear to have bought the Democrat talking points hook, line, and sinker.


Guns are way down the list of CA voter concerns.


Indeed. That's reflected in the vehement opposition of the Democrats, with only a few useful idiots to offer token support our side on the RTKBA. Yet never when it matters (latest ban, fee, or restriction to be signed by Moonbeam).


Yes CA Reeps should be more like Dems on most (nongun) social issues SO THEY CAN FRIGGIN' WIN and carry gunrights and basic fiscal conservatism forward.


Yeah the Governator worked out great. :rolleyes:


There are few black and Latino social conservatives - or rather, they may be somewhat social conservatives but they will be voting Dem anyway. Prop 8 was result of an accidental carryover due to a unique time that will not be replicated, nor would it pass today.

How many blacks and latinos do you thinks are hitting up Chick-Fil-A? The cultures haven't grown more sympathetic, nor do the groups generally appreciate the civil rights analogies from the homosexuals, either. Both are even far less sympathetic to gun rights, unfortunately.

Meplat1
08-02-2012, 10:39 AM
Yes CA Reeps should be more like Dems on most (nongun) social issues SO THEY CAN FRIGGIN' WIN and carry gunrights and basic fiscal conservatism forward.

What is needed is more participation by the libertarians in Republican politics. Pressure from the Tea Party wing of the GOP seems to be working in some parts of the country, but it is too socially conservative to fly here. A big dose of libertarianism would make the GOP much more viable here.

ja308
08-02-2012, 11:24 AM
Carly lost because she opened her mouth on abortion that was completely opposite of what the majority of CA wants and she did not support marriage equality.

I wish your statement was correct ,if it were we would have a chance for candidates like those elected in other states -- Carly lost because of a dumbed down population that believes major media .
Our fellow californains are really a stupid bunch a voters . Democrats along with 3rd party did in carly -simple as that .
As for marriage equality -- I think chic fillet proves a different point .

Dragunov
08-02-2012, 11:56 AM
Glad I contributed to the tea party . Ted Cruz will be a welcome addition to the US senate .

The answer to the question . "why cant we get candidiates like that in california?
We do , Carly fiorina was as good as candidates get .
Why did she lose?
Stupid democrats.
Even dumber libertarians .
A major media that is able to wrap simple peoples thoughts around their agenda!Dan Lungren. I have been able to set with him one-on-one a few times. I know him as an aquaintance. He's really straight up. More people need to support him, send him donations with a letter on not supporting gun control. I haven't spoken with him recently, but I can assume he hasn't changed his pro-2A position.

http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Dan_Lungren_Gun_Control.htm

sholling
08-02-2012, 11:58 AM
What is needed is more participation by the libertarians in Republican politics. Pressure from the Tea Party wing of the GOP seems to be working in some parts of the country, but it is too socially conservative to fly here. A big dose of libertarianism would make the GOP much more viable here.
Correction: The TEA Party is only socially conservative in the fevered minds of self deluding liberals and in the words of liberal media types eager to tell any lie necessary to discredit them with the public. As a whole TEA Party groups have scrupulously avoided any issues other than a return to fiscal responsibility and constitutional restraints on the reach and power of government. There may be individuals TEA Party members who are socially conservative (and others who are socially liberal) but their opinions are individual opinions just like there are individuals within the Libertarian movement that don't agree with everything Gary Johnson stands for. The TEA Party itself stands for fiscal responsibility and enforcement of constitutional restraints on the size and scope of government.

sholling
08-02-2012, 12:01 PM
Dan Lungrin. I have been able to set with him one-on-one a few times. I know him as an aquaintance. He's really straight up. More people need to support him, send him donations with a letter on not supporting gun control. I haven't spoken with him recently, but I can assume he hasn't changed his pro-2A position.

http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Dan_Lungren_Gun_Control.htm

Good old "Gun Ban Dan" Lungren. If you want guns banned he's the guy to support. He was one of the figures behind the Calif AWB and nearly as big a gun grabber as Feinstein. Don't fall for his line of BS.

http://www.nrawinningteam.com/states/ca4.html

Dragunov
08-02-2012, 12:48 PM
Good old "Gun Ban Dan" Lungren. If you want guns banned he's the guy to support. He was one of the figures behind the Calif AWB and nearly as big a gun grabber as Feinstein. Don't fall for his line of BS.

http://www.nrawinningteam.com/states/ca4.htmlOk, I didn't know this. Thanks!

Exile Machine
08-02-2012, 1:05 PM
Happily crawled over broken glass twice (once in the primary and again in the run-off) to vote for Ted Cruz.

Mr. Dewhurst did not help his own case by hammering on Mr. Cruz with a barrage of personal-attack ads that were so far out in left field and such a convoluted reach that they actually called into question Mr. Dewhurst's own judgement.

-Mark

Liberty1
08-02-2012, 1:53 PM
Nice, my Senator from Kentucky needs reinforcements! And I'm glad to soon be represented by Texas (since I get no representation in CA). Now only 58 more needed?

Meplat1
08-02-2012, 7:18 PM
Correction: The TEA Party is only socially conservative in the fevered minds of self deluding liberals and in the words of liberal media types eager to tell any lie necessary to discredit them with the public. As a whole TEA Party groups have scrupulously avoided any issues other than a return to fiscal responsibility and constitutional restraints on the reach and power of government. There may be individuals TEA Party members who are socially conservative (and others who are socially liberal) but their opinions are individual opinions just like there are individuals within the Libertarian movement that don't agree with everything Gary Johnson stands for. The TEA Party itself stands for fiscal responsibility and enforcement of constitutional restraints on the size and scope of government.

You actually have some very good points here.