Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Ted Cruz’s Latest Ad Sounds a Lot Like Trump

Ted Cruz’s Latest Ad Sounds a Lot Like Trump

The Donald Effect

One of Senator Cruz’s latest campaign ads sounds a little bit familiar.

Worried, released late last week, has no mention of the Washington Cartel, DC insiders, or Obamacare — Cruz’s hallmark talking points. Instead, his campaign has opted for a soft embrace of a few Trumpisms.

The ad goes (bolded for emphasis):

“As American families sit around their kitchen tables, they’re worried. Worried they’re falling behind. Worried about their jobs, their freedom, their security. That’s why I’m running for President — to restore opportunity, raise wages, and bring jobs back to America. To secure our border and protect us from our enemies. To reverse the damage Obama has done and restore the Constitution.”

Nicely sandwiched between his restorative mantras are hot-button issues that worked well for Trump, though Cruz’s approach is arguably more palatable.

It’s The Donald Effect. In an effort to cull the disenfranchised that up until now have coalesced behind Sanders or Trump, Cruz is moving his messaging closer to Donald’s. Tactically, it’s a smart move. Troubling is that Trump offers very little in the way of conservative solutions and Cruz has branded himself as the preeminent conservative of the era. Get too close to the populist mob and Cruz runs the risk of getting thrown off course.

Hillary Clinton was sucked into the same trap with Bernie Sanders. To appeal to his enthusiastic base, Clinton veered further leftward to keep pace with Sanders’ progressive stride.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


How pathetic.
He uses Trump words/methods/themes
to sell his soul…err…himself.

Yet: In need of more than 80% of remaining delegates to reach 1,237, Cruz is nothing more than a SPOILER at this point. He consciously works to block Trump…to the SOLE benefit of the GOP Establishment.

Whether the GOPe later throws him to the side for an as-yet-unknown, or lets Teddy Boy run and lose, the GOPe “wins” by having their ELITE “relative” Hillary win.

STATUS QUO reigns once again.

BUT: using Trump’s schtick to try to beat Trump?
Sad. Sad. SAD.

    rotten in reply to Kauf Buch. | March 28, 2016 at 5:20 pm

    A realistic best case scenerio for Cruz has him losing 900 to 1100 before unbound delagates and Superdelagates are considered. Then he has to sweep those or take faithless Trump delagates on a second ballot.

    Why is he still running?

    There’s no way he can win and have the election seen as legitimate.

    It is entirely transparent, Kauf.

    Cruz also decided HE would build a wall on the Mexican border…

    Right… like his DC puppet masters will ever allow him to be nominated. He is a false GOP endorsement. They fear Trump, but they hate Cruz who now sucks up to them.

    It’s quite disgusting to watch… I had such high hopes for Ted.

      Kauf Buch in reply to VotingFemale. | March 28, 2016 at 7:51 pm

      You wrote, “Right… like his DC puppet masters will ever allow him to be nominated.”

      But please CONSIDER what the GOPe has to gain by “allowing” the nomination of Cruz (as opposed to any “third party anonymous” person such as Ryan):

      With Cruz (or whomever), the millions upon millions of crossover Democrat and Independent voters (who support Trump) would simply walk away from the GOP in the General election…bringing the GOPe TWO ADVANTAGES:

      1) they keep the “Status Quo” by having their inbred Democrat elite “relative” Hillary elected as President, AND

      2) they can cry, “See?!! A conservative can NEVER win!”

        They’re turn at the OZ bench of knobs and levers is coming to a close. They know why the country has most turned on both DEM & GOP establishment and their royalty.

      Ragspierre in reply to VotingFemale. | March 28, 2016 at 7:56 pm

      You’ve become a much more apparent…and prolific…liar since you broke cover a few days back, mole troll.

      The TRUTH is that Cruz was advocating a wall when Mr. Establishment was supporting the Gang of Eight and meeting with Dreamers.

      The truth is the Der Donald is “me, too, Donnie”, as demonstrated when he followed the Cruz idea of local policing of Muslims, instead of chanting, “We gotta be very, very careful, and very, very vigilant, and very, very strong”.

      The truth is that T-rump is just a very talented huckster without a clue as to how to accomplish his own bullshit IF he were POTUS.

        CloseTheFed in reply to Ragspierre. | March 28, 2016 at 8:56 pm

        Really, Ragspierre, your use of belittling language such as “Der” makes you appear impotent and small.

        And it’s tiresome.

        If you have an argument, make it. Have pity on the rest of us who would like to read the comments, but have tired of your approach.

        PhillyGuy in reply to Ragspierre. | March 28, 2016 at 9:22 pm

        Not true Pugs. He was originally advocating for building the FENCE with enhanced border surveillance using fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft. You are lying. Completely.

      VF, I’m not sure why you keep saying things like this. Ted Cruz didn’t just wake up this week and decide that a wall needs to be built on the southern border. He campaigned on that when he ran for the Senate in 2011. That’s fact. Google it. Read the following interview during his Senate campaign:
      Watch him state it (again, this was in 2011):

      Trump didn’t invent the wall; Congress passed a bill to build it back in 2006.

      It was never built, with both Dems and Republicans voting against its funding: Cruz has always said, adamantly said, that he wants the wall built.

      It’s one thing to dislike a candidate or to be willfully blind to one’s own favored candidates’ myriad flaws; it’s quite another to repeatedly state things that are patently, demonstrably untrue.

      You do Trump no favors with this sort of thing.

        Don’t bother responding to me, FS.

        PhillyGuy in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | March 28, 2016 at 11:07 pm

        He uses the words “wall” and “fence” interchangeably – which leads one to believe a fence is OK by him.

        and by the way also suggesting that taking private property to do it with JUST COMPENSATION is also OK by him (hmmmm…eminent domain?)

          The 2006 legislation for the border wall referred to it as a border fence; indeed, the act, signed into law by President Bush, was called the “Secure Fence Act of 2006.”

          What are you quibbling about? Trump says “wall” so that means a stretch of wall with armed guards on top ala the Berlin Wall? Or perhaps more like Israel’s West Bank barrier? What is the key difference between either the Berlin Wall or the West Bank barrier and the almost two thousand miles of U.S.-Mexican border? Think about it really really hard because the answer is important.

          Even if Trump did build his zillion mile wall that was 100 feet tall (or whatever Trump fans imagine; the only thing that can possibly be built without a new law passed by Congress is the one that is in existing law), if that wall were the only means of closing our southern border, it would be a giant fail. What has Trump proposed about the extensive tunnel network? About the many small water vessels that infiltrate our coastal regions? About the border checkpoints that Mexican drug cartels happily drive straight through? Oh? Nothing? I thought not. Cruz does have a comprehensive plan, and it’s not only realistic but actually doable. Google it.

          Eminent domain is intended to be used by the government for the benefit of the public. Are you trying to suggest that a border fence/wall is not for the public’s safety? Not in the realm of the federal government’s primary duty, to protect the citizens of the United States? I suspect not. How about a limo parking lot? You all in favor of trying to tear down an elderly woman’s home for a private businessman to build a parking lot for limos? Do you even see the difference? Seriously, I’m asking. Do you not see the difference between using eminent domain to secure our national border and using eminent domain to build a parking lot for a private businessman with deep pockets (in which are huddled a range of characters from George Soros to Hillary Clinton to Harry Reid)?

          If you really, truly can’t tell the difference, there is no hope for you.

          PhillyGuy in reply to PhillyGuy. | March 29, 2016 at 12:01 am

          Please Fuzzy..back then Cruz was talking about a “wall” like a “fence.” Trump is very clear about building a “big beautiful wall with a door in it for LEGALS to come in.”

          I only threw the eminent domain thing in there because people were shouting about it recently and Cruz was fine with it back then

          Stop with your nonsense.

          It’s not nonsense, PhillyGuy. The law calls for a fence, but the political red meat term is “wall.” Trump fans like to split hairs and imagine that Trump is the first person to ever think of a southern border barrier, but he’s not.

          Congress passed a bill to build one, and President Bush signed it into law. Trump didn’t say a whisper about it until this election cycle. Not one word that I can find online. He bashed, in 2012, Romney for his “harsh” policies that included cutting taxpayer funding to illegals and e-verify, moves that would make coming to and staying here pointless. SO let me ask you, if cutting illegals’ taxpayer-funded “benefits” and ensuring that they can not work “under the table” is cruel and heartless, what is rounding them up and dragging them from their homes? How on earth can you imagine that the same guy who thought eliminating public assistance to illegals in an effort to get them to go back home was heartless and “mean” will deport any illegal who is not a violent criminal?

          Trump fans are so worried about every word that Cruz says–up to and including his accurate description of the proper use of eminent domain–and how it meshes with anything else he’s said, but they completely ignore the fact that it is Trump, not Cruz, who has repeatedly and for decades advocated progressive policy.

          That Cruz understands the proper and legal use of eminent domain is not a negative. That Trump thinks he’s so special that an average American’s home is just an “eyesore” and in the way of his great limo parking lot plans and should therefore be demolished is a definite negative.

          This issue, to me at least, is not even really about eminent domain (Trump the winningest winner of winner town lost that case). It reveals to me a lack of understanding about our country, about the American republic, and about Americans. For Trump, the local government can be and clearly was bought; he railed against this elderly woman’s house, calling it ugly and etc. He didn’t want to increase national security; he didn’t want to do anything for anyone but himself. That says an awful lot about the man’s character and his values. None of it good.

          But hey, I’m the same person who said that Marco Rubio is not to be trusted because he used the Florida GOP credit card for personal expenses and only paid them back–almost two years later!–when he was caught.

          This was before he showed himself to all the world to be a campaign conservative and phony sell-out by refusing to join the Senate Tea Party caucus and, later, by becoming Schumer’s pet republican.

          Bad character is bad character. It never goes away, and it always is. If someone of proven bad character will do A, he’ll do B and C down the road.

          Trump is an unmoored, unprincipled bad character. Given his many positions on really foundational and fundamental issues over the past few years, what makes you think that this latest version of Trump is real? What was he doing before? Where was his core until recently? What makes you so sure that, once elected, Trump doesn’t go back to his other (progressive) identity? That’s the one he’s had the longest, after all, and the one that squares best with his record.

          Oh, but yeah, records don’t matter . . . unless they’re someone other than Trump. His record doesn’t matter at all.

          And he’s not even the first person to discuss in this presidential primary. Back when Cruz was talking about building the border fence that was passed and signed into law by President Bush, Trump was sputtering about Obama’s birth certificate in his attempt to garner the support of (in his terms) “rightwing crazies.” Trump had zero opinion about the wall from the passage of the 2006 law until this year. But, sure, he’s all about America.

          Oh, and speaking of the “legals” that Trump will let back in . . . have you given his touchback amnesty plan any thought at all? What would he consider “legal”? Has he pledged to revoke Obama’s Dreamer executive order (the answer is no)? Trump’s plan consists of “letting the ‘good ones'” back in after they touch home base. He doesn’t say what happens next. Haven’t you wondered about that? What about these “good” illegal aliens who dutifully return to their home country and then come back? Do they get legal status then? Citizenship?? Trump’s a bit vague on that point.

          Eminent domain has a clear function, and my guess is that it wasn’t intended to be used by private businessmen to build limo parking lots.

          But, yeah, I’m just spewing nonsense, right? You know better.

          PhillyGuy in reply to PhillyGuy. | March 29, 2016 at 12:59 am

          Fuzzy your meandering response was fascinating. I see you took the little tidbit I threw out about eminent domain and ran with it. I did note that Cruz actually said the Trump bulldozed that woman’s home down which in fact, he did not.

          I want to go back to the original point which was the use of the word “wall” to mean “fence” in Ted Cruz fuzzy word-land. Here is what I took off the Cruz campaign site. I apologize for the length.

          “The unsecured border with Mexico invites illegal immigrants, criminals, and terrorists to tread on American soil. Millions of people from all over the world, including from hostile nations and terrorist havens, have been apprehended at our southern border – and many who make it through are never caught. This is a failure of the highest order. I will fulfill the promise Congress made to the American people almost 10 years ago by completing all 700 miles of priority fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border, and dedicate the resources necessary to replace all single-layer fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border to build a fence that keeps people out and that is technology-supported and law enforcement-accessible. If other nations, such as Israel, can build an effective border wall, the United States certainly can.”

          It is very clear that when Cruz says “wall” he means “fence.” For gosh sakes, it’s part of his platform. This is no different than back when he ran for Senate.

          You Cruz Davidians get fooled by such a polished liar.

          Heh, PhillyGuy, I guess my response was a bit meandering. I can’t deny that.

          Cruz did not say that Trump bulldozed that woman’s home (I can’t link to him not saying it, so you’ll have to provide the link to him saying it).

          I really don’t get your fixation on the words “wall” and “fence.” They are interchangeable to most people because the law that establishes the fence calls it a fence. “Wall” is the more common term among non-Congress critters, but I am at a loss as to why this is such a bone of contention for you. It sounds a bit . . . um, petty and strange.

          So I guess to your mind, Trump’s wall is totally different from a border fence? You do understand, I’m hoping, that there is only one wall that has been approved by Congress and signed by the president. One. Wall. And it was called a fence. Do you know that Trump, nor any other president, can just willy nilly build walls on a whim? You must know that Congress not only has to pass a law but also has to fund it. That land has to be acquired, and on and on. Oh, yeah, right, Mexico will build and pay for it. Bwahaha! (Sorry, I giggle every time I hear that lunacy, more so that people actually believe it. I think that Trump meant that as a joke when he first said it, but simps jumped up and down in glee, so he pretended he meant it. Seriously. Watch the vid of his saying that the first time and his reaction to the crowd’s mindless applause and hoots of approval; it’s hilarious.)

          It’s such a weird thing to get hung up on. Is there some kind of secret Trump language that the rest of us don’t understand because we’re all grounded in reality? “Wall” is the secret Trump code word, and anyone who uses the word “fence” is the enemy who should be added to the Big Trump Book of “Things to Do and Who to Sue”?

          PhillyGuy in reply to PhillyGuy. | March 29, 2016 at 9:48 am

          Absolutely Cruz references it in his position statements as a fence. In the debate, the moderators went through the costs of a fence and Cruz didn’t argue with the characterization.

          Trump talks about building a wall with pre-slabbed concrete in his stump speeches all the time. In fact, when Vicente Fox complained about it, Trump joked the wall got 10 feet higher. He even talks about the Great Wall of China.

          You are moving the bar by saying you don’t understand the difference. It’s obvious. A wall connotes much stronger security than a fence. Cruz was never for building a wall like Trump is. He wants to build a fence as I showed you from his position statement. Cruz is using the word “wall” to fog the issue and make it seem like he is as tough on this as Trump is. That is not the case.

          Here is the Cruz ad which accuses Trump of bulldozing the woman’s home which, by the way, was finally destroyed but by someone else.

        Sorry FS but you lost all credibility with your worshipful posts about Rabidspierre and how you agreed with everything he said while he used his filthy mouth to repeatedly trash and insult half the commenters here.

        Your blanket endorsement of someone who spews vapid political analysis packed with more immature insults and infantile innuendo than Trump could ever dream of detracts from your persuasive ability.

          DaMav, this may surprise you a bit, but I’m not interested in or seeking your validation.

          While you’re busy detecting “vapid political analysis packed with more immature insults and infantile innuendo han Trump could ever dream of” let me know how your own posts measure up. Or those of the recent Trump troll Gary. Or pretty much any Trump supporter who posts here.

          Meanwhile, I’m off to wallow in my latest fun title of “filthy whore for Cruz.” Naw, Rags didn’t post that one, but one of your Trump cohorts did. But yeah, keep preaching civility; we’re all ears. It’s super meaningful and all that.

          Beam. Eye. Remove.

          DaMav in reply to DaMav. | March 29, 2016 at 3:09 am

          Suit yourself. I’m not responsible for what somebody else calls you nor would I gush about how wholeheartedly I love everything they post.

          Fuzzy you are a LIAR as well as “whoring for Cruz agitprop” that is the second time you’ve claimed quotes on something completely false.

          I guess you forgot how that line was IN RESPONSE to your gratuitously piling in on a Ragspierre post of insults to me. And then you want to hide behind your skirt and get all vapors and such.

          You’re SCUM just like your boys Cruz and Ragspierre.

          Ah yes, you called me a “worthless whore,” not a “filthy” one. So much better. You have insulted me repeatedly, Gary, as you have every other Cruz supporter who comments on this site (where NO ONE supports Trump, as you must know). You may not be aware of this, but no one is at all influenced by your or other Trump chumps’ bizarre and vile ranting. Well, maybe Voting Female (VF), but . . . . who cares what she thinks?

          You keep hammering the time that I intervened when VF was threatening Rags (she was going to “report” him with links or some such grade school craziness). That was wrong, and I would not stand for it. No one has the right to intimidate or threaten LI readers (well, except the prof, and he doesn’t bother, he just bans).

          I’m sorry that your itty bitty feewings were hurt that I would stand by and support a long-time LI reader and commenter who has demonstrated time and again that he is the real deal in terms of Constitutional conservatism and who is not swept up in base emotion to support a man who would be a disaster for our republic, but that’s just too bad. Actually, Rags can take care of himself, as he’s shown in his daily pwns of you, so my actual gripe with VF was her attempting to use some nonexistent influence on this site to punish another. That’s the Trump bully-M.O., though, so I shouldn’t have been surprised. But then, no Trump fan should be surprised that actual conservatives don’t back down and push back twice as hard.

          I am not scum, nor is Rags. And nor (probably) are you. You are just a mean, nasty little troll who must be paid to post so much on this site . . . probably by the Cruz campaign since your vile rantings and ad hominem attacks do Cruz far much more good than they do your purported candidate. Personally, I’d love to see you leave here . . . off to greener, Trump-friendly pastures. Try Breitbart or Gateway Pundit. They’re more your speed.

Cruz isn’t called “Me Too Teddy” for nothing.

Cruz is “more palatable”. That’s code for Lyin Ted doesn’t really mean what he says. Its all an illusion and deception which are typical for Cruz.

Cruz is for Obamatrade and more job killing stupid free trade deals. Cruz will join with McConnell to pass Obamatrade after the election while Obama is still in office to sign it.

Cruz will NEVER build a real wall 30ft high and 1,000 miles long. He doesn’t mention a wall in is more palatable talking point. Secure the border. The same words McCain and Graham and McConnell use.

If you want Trump vote Trump. Nobody needs or wants a Faux Trump/Trump Lite just like nobody needs or wants Democrat Lite/Faux Republicans.

Cruz, pimping faux principles for votes.


Why hasn’t Cruz demanded a retraction from National Enquirer #CubanMistressCrisis story ??

Why isn’t Cruz the vaunted supreme court lawyer suing the National Enquirer over #CruzSexScandalStory ??

Is Cruz afraid they won’t retract and a lawsuit would lead to depositions of Cruz and Mistresses under oath???

is the sort of “free trade” Cruz supports.
(it’s only 4 minutes but well worth it)


    Cruz is out of his league in presidential politics, in my observation.

    His shady stunts, tricks, tactics might work in Houston or Austin but not on the big stage.

    I can’t express how much of a disappointment he is to me.

    Sarah Palin called it right on him.

Henry Hawkins | March 28, 2016 at 4:10 pm

Would the author please point out one single thing said by Cruz in this ad that he hasn’t been saying for years?

    Kauf Buch in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 28, 2016 at 4:14 pm

    Oh, I’m *sure* Cruz may have said this for years.

    After all, he’s little more than TALK, TALK, TALK….

    formerlyanonymous in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 28, 2016 at 6:25 pm

    Yes, to those who have followed Cruz for a while he is saying nothing new. These are positions he’s had since his time at the FTC, in Texas and in the Senate.

    Of course, if one were to ask the same about Trump the answer would be different. Only recently has he spoken out on such issues and his previous actions contradict his statements.

    Would the author please point out one single thing said by Cruz in this ad that he hasn’t been saying for years?

    I’d be interested in hearing an answer to that as well. Fair enough if people prefer some other candidate to Ted Cruz, but one thing that’s for sure and certain about him is his consistent track record as a conservative. He was saying all these so-called “Trumpian” things back when Trump was still a Hillary-hugging Democrat.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Amy in FL. | March 28, 2016 at 6:54 pm

      The author has demonstrated the difference between a political journalist and a garden variety propagandist.

      Rick in reply to Amy in FL. | March 28, 2016 at 8:32 pm

      Amy, Henry, and the few others of you who have the stomach to respond to the Trump trolls: I commend you.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to Rick. | March 28, 2016 at 9:20 pm

        I ignore the Trump trolls, as I do mosquitoes, ticks, and other pests with whom one cannot hold an adult discussion. I’m responding to the author’s sophomoric attempt at unsupportable propaganda, butt-hurt as she apparently is after hero Rubio flamed out (she flogged for him incessantly under false flags of concern-trolling, faux objectivity, etc.).

        How do we know it’s just resentful propaganda? Because there can and will be zero response to a perfectly reasonable request that she simply name one thing Cruz says in this ad that he hasn’t been saying since she was in high school and Trump was a registered Democrat. Then Reform Party. Then a Republican. Then a Democrat again. Then a….

        I would think an ongoing byline on a respected blog like LI to be a genuine honor and opportunity and I’m saddened to see it wasted with such obvious clumsy trickery.

        See? I can do badly executed concern-trolling, too.

          PhillyGuy in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 28, 2016 at 9:25 pm

          Point to where he has been a registered Democrat, please.

          You know the professor, Henry. One of his many admirable traits is that he respects our (speaking as an LI author and about all of us who write here) viewpoints. We aren’t told whom to support or how to think, and that’s one of the many wonderful things about contributing here. There is zero pressure to think a certain way, and I, as a long-time supporter of Cruz, don’t mind one tiny bit that other LI writers don’t share my enthusiasm for him.

          We are all honored and blessed to write for LI; about that you are right. But a lot of that bounty is closely related to the freedom we have in terms of our own viewpoints and candidate preferences.

          Actually, I don’t envy Professor Jacobson one bit in that regard because, as he’s noted previously, he does need to balance his writers’ opinions with providing as balanced coverage as is possible. On the bright side, Henry, none of us are Trump fans, so that’s something. 😛

          Henry Hawkins in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 29, 2016 at 12:43 am

          Fuzzy, I’ve zero problem with any LI contributor supporting any candidate, including Clinton or Sanders. What I object to is the practice of hiding support so clumsily, like we’re stupid or something, incapable of discerning the bias. That is not good. Writing which thus disrespects the intended reader is bad writing and beneath LI standards. IMHO, of course.

          This article purports that Cruz is assuming Trump positions as a political ploy, posting an ad showing Cruz espousing positions he’s held for years and years, long before Trump was on the radar. This was done either out of ignorance or out of knowing artifice, and neither is acceptable to me, the hallmark of hackery, plain and simple. It’s what drives me away from LI. I return from time to time, but it continues, and so I leave again.

          One of the primary reasons I came to LI and stayed so many years ago (five years is a lifetime in online customer loyalty, lol) is that it was one of the very few online political blogs where one didn’t have to vet articles and writers for such trickery – or ignorance, whichever it is. That is no longer the case where this author is concerned. Other commenters and comments suggest I am not alone in this complaint.

          Well, I, personally, have never hidden my bias for and support of Ted Cruz, but we are all different and have different styles. People unfamiliar with Cruz positions on issues may assume that they were “Trump’s first.” That’s obviously and demonstrably false. I get that.

          You might want to double check that Henry…I don’t see a D there and this goes back to 1989

          Silly. The “R” there doesn’t stand for “Republican.” See this comment explaining it:

          Let me start out by saying that Mr. Trump has never denied any of the below facts. He has useful idiots do that for him.

          I’ve spent a lot of time at boards of election here in New York and know a great deal about this topic. So let me explain the document that you posted. I’ll tell you what it shows and, more importantly, what it doesn’t show.

          The first column is easy enough. It has dates. You might be interested in knowing that, since 1988, your own document reveals that Mr. Trump has never voted in a presidential primary election in any party. Had he done so, you’d see an entry in March or April of any presidential election year. Let’s hope he does so this year.

          The second column is straightforward, too. It denotes General (GE) or Primary (PR) election. Mr. Trump did vote in primary elections in 2013 (NYC Mayor Republican) and in 2010 (Republican primaries for governor and two US senate contests.

          Now your confusion occurs where “R” appears in the next two columns. R here stands for regular and not Republican. In 2006 and 2004, you’ll see codes “A” and “B” not “R.” Those mean that Trump didn’t vote regularly, but by absentee ballot. The last column denotes the type of voter. R again stands for regular. Other possible codes would be (M) for military voters, (P) permanently disabled voters (who needn’t apply for absentee ballots annually) or (F) federal voters (those who’ve emigrated but can still vote in federal elections).

          So the document you produced doesn’t prove Mr. Trump has been a lifelong GOPer. It does prove that he’s not bothered himself to vote in a presidential primary since 1988. Shame on him.

          Here’s his “enrollment” history:

          * JULY 1987: At age 41 Trump registers for the first time. Trump enrolls as a REPUBLICAN.

          * OCTOBER 1999: Trump dumps the GOP and enrolls as a member of the INDEPENDENCE PARTY. Note that he tried to run for president a year later in 2000 as its candidate.

          * AUGUST 2001: Trump enrolls as a DEMOCRAT.

          * SEPTEMBER 2009: After eight years as a Democrat, Trump returns to the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

          * DECEMBER 2011: Trump lasts two years before he again abandons the party of Ronald Reagan. He eschews the GOP in favor of siding with no party. On his registration form, he checks off the box marked “I DO NOT WISH TO ENROLL IN A PARTY.” We call such folks “blanks.”

          * APRIL 2012: Trump registers as a REPUBLICAN.

          Now, this, as Senator Kennedy once said, “is water under the bridge.” I’m no big fan of the GOP. Several members of my immediate family belong to the Conservative Party here in New York. FIVE changes is a bit much though.

          Whoever posted that image in the first place and told you that Trump has always been a Republican misinformed you. Consider that tidbit when evaluating other information that source or similar sources provide. I fact check everything I post.

          You Trumpkins really need to stop being so gullible. It’s really cringeworthy, watching you get taken in time and time again.

          PhillyGuy in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 29, 2016 at 9:26 am

          I stand corrected on that. And Amy you have posted incorrect things just like the rest of us. Stop with your holier than thou attitude.

    So Cruz was saying in this Ad how he supports trade deals like Obamatrade. Afterall THAT is the truth of what he’s been saying for a while. He wrote a Wall Street Journal Op Ed last year explaining why Obamatrade and fastrack approval were GREAT for the country and he was going to vote for it.

    Then two weeks later somebody told him, we aren’t sure whether it was Glenn Beck or God directly, but somebody told him pssst polls show Trump is right and these trade deals are really unpopular. So two weeks later after writing his editorial praising Obamatrade and after voting for the amendments necessary to guaratee TPA fast track filibuster proof passage, old “Me Too Teddy” tried to do some show boating to “pretend” he had changed his mind. You know the kind of show boating that other GOPe senators are famous for, like McConnell. Designed to fool the rubes, I mean cruzbots.

    Cruz is a LIAR. Worse Cruz is dangerous. Cruz is a cult religious zealot who believes he is annointed by God to be president. That is plenty scary. I never want a religious nut job who literally believes these are the “end times” and he is annointed by God to fulfill the whacko dreams of his dominionist religious cult of which he is a member. The “annointed one”.

    I will NEVER vote for Cruz for these and many other reasons. Cruz is just a GOPe stooge at this point but with added disability of being a dangerous religious nut job zealot cult leader to boot.

    #neverCruz The Trumpaphobes got the never part right. It was the proper noun after they got wrong.

    Cruz will NEVER be president because the majority of Trump supporters will sit on their hands election day or do like me and go to the polls and follow Mitt Romney’s advice. Vote strategically against the GOP all up and down the ballot by voting straight democrat for the first time in my life.


Cruz seems to always be a day late and dollar short.
He glomms onto whatever Trump is saying with a luke-warm me-too a few days later, and tries to make it look like his idea.
He doesn’t seem to have an original thought in his head.

He’s Conservative Lite. Less filling, tastes like water.

Cruz is exactly what the Republican voter rebellion is reacting against. No more appeasement. Time to be heard!

    Milhouse in reply to Twanger. | March 28, 2016 at 6:48 pm

    Liar. Trump is the one who copied Cruz, and added stupid embellishments. Cruz is saying exactly what he’s been saying all along.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Milhouse. | March 28, 2016 at 6:53 pm

      HOLY CRAP, I agree with Milhouse (j/k, lol).

      Kauf Buch in reply to Milhouse. | March 28, 2016 at 7:54 pm

      HAH! HAH!

      Except the GOP Establishment is TERRIFIED of TRUMP
      because they believe TRUMP
      will follow through on his words!

      PhillyGuy in reply to Milhouse. | March 28, 2016 at 9:28 pm

      Not true. Cruz supported an amendment to the Gang of Eight bill that provided a path to legalization. Made an impassioned plea to pass it too. Got busted on it in an interview with Brett Baier and and hemmed and hawed stammered a bit then changed the subject.

        formerlyanonymous in reply to PhillyGuy. | March 28, 2016 at 10:20 pm

        You conveniently miss the key point of the amendment, which was to deny citizenship to anyone who’d been here illegally.

        To claim that Cruz offered an amendment for legalization when a key tenet of the Go8 bill was legalization AND citizenship is pure balderdash.

I still remember Senator Trump’s 21 hour speech against funding obamacare. Very inspiring to see the Donald vote against funding it.
Made him a hated person in the Senate.

Oh, wait a sec. hmmm…. Maybe it wasn’t Senator Trump after all.

“If Senate Republicans stand together, we can stop [Majority Leader] Harry Reid,” said Cruz, the Tea Party-backed senator.

Trump’s policies, the wall, the Muslim ban, not immediately bombing Russia, reevaluating trade deals, firing SJWs in the federal bureaucracy…..

His policies outpoll him,

This suggests that all the GOP had to do to beat Trump was steal his policies.

That’s it.

But even now they refuse to do this. The GOP really is for the free flow of illegals and drugs across the border, foisting Muslim warriors on a population that doesn’t want them, for having big government foist PC on everyone, for exporting USA jobs, and starting WW3 with Russia (even while Muslims bomb Europe). Those are the effects of GOP policies, whether GOP wants to admit this or not.

Viva Trump. The GOP leadership has to go.

    CloseTheFed in reply to rotten. | March 28, 2016 at 9:17 pm

    This is so true. Laura Ingraham has been begging the GOPe to adopt Trump’s policies if they dislike him personally so much…..

    By the way, Trump was discussing many of these things in his 2011 book…. So I understand dismay at his bouncing public statements, but what he wrote was consistent gold.

    Cruz has been very savvy in his moves vis-a-vis Trump. He didn’t criticize Trump or his supporters for the longest time. I don’t mind Cruz picking up Trump’s issues if he will follow through if elected. Cruz is smart, and I’m glad to see if he gets new insight on what Americans believe are needed to sustain the country, I’m glad he’s open to adapting.

    Great points, rotten! Trump’s current policies (who knows what they’ll be tomorrow) are indeed favored by a lot of voters (he’s not, but whatever).

    The GOPe spouted a lot of anti-Obama’s fundamental transformation rhetoric during election cycles: they baited and switched, they lied through their teeth, and they sincerely believed that they could get away with it. Again.

    Why wouldn’t they think that? The one legitimate movement that could have changed the course of Obama’s presidency and of our nation (even the world, definitely the Middle East) was beaten back and down by not only the leftist media and Dems but by these very GOPe hacks.

    They didn’t want their apple cart upset by a bunch of yokels with naive ideas about liberty and our American republic, so they joined in when every leftist from Obama to the MSNBC loons was raging against and taking action against the TEA Party.

    The problem with Trump is not that his (current) stance on a couple of issues is popular it’s that he’s never held these positions until this campaign cycle. Never. Held. Them. Before. Ever.

    That tells a lot of us that he doesn’t actually believe what he is saying. Romney was (rightly) lambasted for RomneyCare, but Trump’s relatively long-term (for him) vocal support for government-mandated, government-managed universal health care gets a pass. This is true of most issues that matter to most conservatives.

    Trump is the supreme campaign phony, and we know this because we have videos of him going all the way back to the ’80s supporting leftist and progressive policy. If you believe that all of that was a lie and that he is only now telling the truth or that he’s “evolved,” you will be sorely disappointed with a President Trump.

    He’s already stated that the wall is negotiable, everything is negotiable on that count, according to Trump himself. What is it about his own words that his fans can’t understand? It’s a mystery to me.

Following behind…not leading.
AFTER he sees it is “safe” or expedient.

Yeah…not leading. We need a “not leader” again in the White House, right?

    CloseTheFed in reply to profshadow. | March 28, 2016 at 9:18 pm

    This is why I prefer Trump. Trump gets it in his gut.

    I cannot say enough good things about the man that brought the families of the dead victims of illegal alien crime to the podium and got them the attention they needed.

Well isn’t it obvious Cruz wants to “scoop up the Trump voters”.
I refuse to be scooped up by a scumbag like Cruz.
Too bad there are six women who are willing.

Henry Hawkins | March 29, 2016 at 1:11 am

I am no longer surprised that even the most ardent Trump supporters remain ignorant of his history of changing party affiliations as often as he presumably changes his underwear, even less surprised that these willfully ignorant will demand non-Trump supporters to support this fact, as if we’re lying or something. Here’ Trump’s record of changing party affiliations willy-nilly:

“Trump’s party affiliation has changed over the years. Until 1987, he was a Democrat;[3] then he was a Republican from 1987 to 1999.[2] He then switched to the Reform Party from 1999 to 2001.[2] After a presidential exploratory campaign with the Reform Party, he wrote an OpEd in the New York Times stating that he was leaving the Reform Party because of the involvement of “David Duke, Pat Buchanan and Lenora Fulani. That is not company I wish to keep.”[215] From 2001 to 2009 he was a Democrat again;[2] he switched to the Republican Party again from 2009 to 2011.[2] An independent from 2011 to 2012, he returned to the Republican Party in 2012, where he has remained.[2]”

Trump’s a businessman. Me too. I’m now retired, but I owned and operated a seven location chain of offices providing psych and CD treatment for those ordered by the court to obtain them. I also owned and operated several franchise restaurants in NC, Roly Poly Rolled Sandwiches. I was also the majority owner (money guy) financing a sign company, two real estate offices, and I bankrolled the practice of two attorneys fresh out of law school until they bought me out in five years, just as we planned. I know business, which means I know businessmen.

Trump’s habit of changing political party affiliations reveals a very basic, very common business practice – Trump reads the market and what it wants, and then provides it, whatever it is. In business, he primarily operated in the commercial real estate market. In politics, he was a Democrat when his ‘market’ dictated that was what he needed to be. When the market changed he became a Republican. And a Reform Party member and candidate (he won a California primary in the Reform Party). The political market changed again and so he became a Democrat again. Then an independent. And now the market says he should be a Republican, so he switched again. He’s a weathervane chasing the market winds.

I don’t care what Trump says. He cannot be trusted based on this alone. He judges the market and then becomes what he believes that market wants. Oh, but Henry! Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat! Yep, as a young man he was. He changed affiliation once, decades before running for president. My first party affiliation was as a Democrat, in 1976. Carter cured me of that. I’ve been registered unaffiliated ever since.

Trump has changed party affiliation SEVEN TIMES since 1987. He’s changed party affiliation FIVE TIMES just since 2000. He’s a political chameleon and you’d have to be an idiot to believe him when he says he’s now a Republican. Trump says he’s whatever he thinks you (the market) want him to be. You’d also have to be an idiot to think Trump won’t change parties again when it becomes politically expedient. We’ve already seen he’ll change positions overnight. Trump is everything; Trump is nothing.

Obama lies like no president before him, but it’s all to create smoke and mirrors around a never-changing, constant, reliable ideology and agenda, albeit a socialist and borderline communist agenda. Trump cannot provide even that sick sort of consistency and reliability.

Cruz and Trump both have their flaws but trying portray them as the devil incarnate is hyperbole. Either would be a vast improvement over Obama. Both would stand head and shoulders over any Democrat in sight.

Here is what concerns me about Cruz. He is a solid conservative and a good man imo, but is being manipulated by the GOPe. I mean really, endorsed by Graham and Bush? They would stick a knife in his back the second after they use him to block Trump.

Which is The Plan:

1) Use Cruz to block Trump from first ballot victory
2) Knife Cruz in the back and dump him
3) Bring in GOPe “Unity Candidate” and nominate them by manipulating the rules

If my primary were today I would vote for Cruz. But I will also be satisfied, relieved, and maybe even happy if Trump takes the nomination. But I’ll be damned pizzed to say the least if it is stolen back at the last minute by the GOPe. And doubly so if they use Ted Cruz to make it happen.

    Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | March 29, 2016 at 6:34 am

    What’s funny, D’Mav, is that you are STILL trying to play this mole troll game where your PRETEND some support for Cruz in your lying posts.

    But in every one I can remember, you are playing the role of a T-rump subversive. As here.

      DaMav in reply to Ragspierre. | March 29, 2016 at 8:05 am

      Let me try to get this snooty disdain act down.

      Sniff sniff, nose up in the air, flounce flounce… clears throat dramatically…

      “Rabidpierre, this may surprise you a bit, but I’m not interested in or seeking your validation.” (sic)

      lmao at you and those slippers tickling your behind

T-rump has the highest negatives among independents, according to these polls.

He sure does with this independent…

I won’t vote for a Collectivist fraud.

Whoooops, there it is…

The lady confirms most of what I and others have observed in Der Donald.