Type to search

Endorse This: Elite New York GOPers Ignore Ted Cruz

Campaign 2016 Endorse This Politics

Endorse This: Elite New York GOPers Ignore Ted Cruz

Share
Ted Cruz New York gala people crowd

The New York State Republican Party held a fancy gala last night (featuring chocolate elephants) and three presidential contenders showed up to make their case to the Big Apple’s big timers. With Tuesday’s primary rapidly approaching, it was an opportunity for John Kasich and Ted Cruz to try to make up ground with a state establishment that, for the most part, is loyal to Donald Trump.

Reporters at the event, however, were more amused that the crowd shunned Ted Cruz:

As NBC News embed Vaughn Hillyard showed, the crowd just didn’t care about Ted Cruz; he doesn’t embody “New York values” nearly as much as Donald Trump, who spent his speech detailing his list of deals in the city to a far more attentive audience.

Screengrab via Rosie Gray/Twitter

Tags:

20 Comments

  1. DOC April 15, 2016

    That is one dumb man if he thinks the people of NY will forget what he said

    Reply
  2. yabbed April 15, 2016

    Everyone on earth should ignore Cruz. He’s a lunatic who believes he was “anointed by God to be President” and who wants to replace our Constitutional law with Biblical law. I think if he wants a theocracy he should move to Israel or Saudi Arabia.

    Reply
    1. Paulinebchurch3 April 16, 2016

      “my room mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet 98$/hr”..,……..!wc577ctwo days ago grey MacLaren P1 I bought after earning 18,512 DoIIars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k DoIIars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over. hourly 87 DoIIars…Learn. More right Here !wc577:➽:➽:➽➽➽➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsLifelineGetPayHourly$98…. .❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦::::::!wc577………/

  3. Elliot J. Stamler April 15, 2016

    As a NY Democrat, I found this event delicious. Cruz of course is anathema here…but these plutocratic jerks at the dinner like Trump because he is a New Yorker and he’s rich. They know that outside of committed Republicans, Trump is so despised right here in New York that if he had not for 30 years ventured into the streets always surrounded by his private goon squad of bodyguards, people would curse him and spit at him. This is why the Republican Party of NY which was once the party of Seward, Theodore Roosevelt, Charles Evans Hughes, Dewey, Ike, Rockefeller, Ives, Keating, Javits is now an utter WRECK and its absurd state chairman, Nixon’s son-in-law, Edward Finch Cox, keeps grinning like a political Alfred E. Newman while predicting Trump is going to sweep NY in the fall.

    Reply
  4. OverthecliffRepublicans April 15, 2016

    Ted Cruz is a regional candidate. Republican Texas and the Republican Midwest and some of the Rocky Mountain States, Wisconsin and sparsely populated Alaska. He has no appeal to independents and is loathed by Democrats. Even his fellow Republicans call him a phony, fraud and carnival barker. He is going to get walloped in New York on Tuesday night.
    He is way too reactionary for New York and America. He is the right wing talk radio candidate for President. So I hope the Republicans nominate him so we can crush him and all the right wing radio talk show hosts in November.

    Reply
  5. Sterling Harris April 15, 2016

    Ever since the tea party became a force in American politics starting in 2010, the anti-government folks’ favorite complaint is how the Constitution has been violated over the years by presidents, Congress and the courts.

    It is a refrain heard daily on radio and TV talk shows, mostly by conservatives howling about the Obama administration, and throughout the blogosphere.

    And those protesting most loudly speak as though they are constitutional experts, having read and comprehended every line and understand the sacred document far better than the jurists who are authorized by that very Constitution to interpret its meaning.

    And now we have the phenomenon of Donald Trump and a vocal, passionate following who have finally found the savior they have sought to bring us back from the abyss of a government that has lost its way and forgotten the principles of the Constitution.

    A study of that following, and a careful viewing of Trump’s rallies, to me show just how the politics in this country have gone awry, and to a large extent I blame the tea party frenzy for taking us down this crazy road.

    The tea party, while actually begun on legitimate principles, has become an amalgam of angry groups, whether they be religious fundamentalists who fear the country has become anti-God, frustrated folks who believe they would have better jobs and lives if we weren’t overrun by immigrants, gun-rights advocates who think for some inexplicable reason that we don’t have enough gun rights in this country, or, to mention the elephant in the room, the racists who can’t stand the fact we have a black president in the White House.

    They have all found a home in the tea party. And they are all angry. And Donald Trump is smart enough to recognize that. He has tapped into it and it has worked for him.

    But his latest outrageous remarks, which seem to have bolstered his base, show how ridiculous the arguments about protecting our Constitution have become.

    Trump has said he wants to ban all Muslims from coming into the country, at least temporarily. He also has said he wants to require that all Muslims in the United States, including U.S. citizens, be registered as Muslims.

    To be fair, most of the other Republican presidential candidates have repudiated that idea, noting correctly how unconstitutional it is. Most responsible Republicans also have denounced the notion of registering citizens on the basis of their religion.

    But Trump’s base has embraced and endorsed the idea. And let’s face it. Trump’s base is the largest single base among the various factions in the Republican party so far in this election cycle.

    If you look at that base at Trump rallies and in social media, and you listen to the rhetoric, it is clear that a large percentage of that base is adamant about their gun rights and any regulation of gun ownership, any type of control to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people, is unconstitutional on its face.
    The Second Amendment, after all, says clearly, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    But when it comes to the First Amendment, according to Trump’s supporters, infringing is OK.
    The language of that amendment also is clear: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
    That means the government cannot favor one religion over others, and it cannot stop or interfere with the practice of any religion, as they all are equal under the law.

    Making Muslims register with the government is about as blatant a violation of that amendment as you can get.
    Yet the Trump nuts are all for it while at the same time screaming that any talk of gun control is violating their constitutional right

    Reply
  6. Sterling Harris April 15, 2016

    Donald Trump is not fit to be president of the United States. Many people have said it — politicians of both parties, economists, pundits, business leaders — but millions of GOP primary voters don’t seem to be listening. Much of the Republican base has taken leave of its senses, a flight blamed alternately on inchoate anger, disgust with inside-the-Beltway candidates and misplaced affection for a plain-speaking cartoon character who often seems to utter whatever nonsense comes into his head. Regardless of the reason for his popularity, the bombastic billionaire continued his soon-to-be unstoppable march toward the nomination Tuesday, racking up resounding victories in primaries across the American South and in the Northeast.

    The reality is that Trump has no experience whatsoever in government, interacting with the machinery of state only as a supplicant. He has shamefully little knowledge of the issues facing the country and the world, and a temperament utterly unsuited to the job. He is a racist and a bully, a demagogue. He has proposed killing the families of terrorists, a violation of international law so blatant that a former CIA director predicted that U.S. troops would refuse to carry out such an order.

    He mocked a disabled person at a campaign rally. He has vowed to reinstate waterboarding and forms of torture that are “much worse.” He intends to seize and deport 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally. He would bar all Muslims from entering the country until further notice. He would “open up our libel laws” so that news organizations are punished for writing critical “hit” pieces. He wants to build a wall along the entire Mexican border, on the fantastical premise that he could force the Mexican government to pay for it. He has threatened to start trade wars with two of the country’s biggest trading partners, Mexico and China, by slapping on the kind of protectionist tariffs that U.S. leaders have been trying for decades to eliminate worldwide.

    Often enough he says nothing at all, promising to replace Obamacare, for instance, with “something great” or assuring listeners vaguely that a winner such as himself — someone who never tires of telling the world he’s rich, successful and famous — will make it all work out one way or another.

    It isn’t easy to tell how much of Trump’s performance is merely shtick and how much is real. In the aftermath of his victories Tuesday, Trump struck a less adversarial tone and talked about how he was “becoming diplomatic.” Yet at the same time, he said this of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), one of several GOP leaders who suggested Trump hadn’t disavowed an endorsement by former KKK leader David Duke forcefully enough: “Paul Ryan, I don’t know him well, but I’m sure I’m going to get along great with him. And if I don’t, he’s going to have to pay a big price, OK?” That’s about as diplomatic a message as a dead fish wrapped in newspaper.

    We hope we won’t have to learn who the real Donald J. Trump might be. Not that we find much to like about his Republican opponents, with whom we disagree sharply on issues that include climate change, environmental protection, healthcare and reproductive rights. In fact, on issues where it’s possible to discern where Trump stands, his views are more moderate at times than those of his principal GOP rivals. And in their zeal to slow Trump’s momentum, some have begun sinking to the Donald’s level as a campaigner, slinging personal insults (at times vulgar ones) instead of focusing on the problems with his record and his campaign. Nevertheless, those candidates are more rational, knowledgeable, understandable and predictable — all of which are necessary (albeit not sufficient) qualities in the Oval Office. Trump’s blustery temperament and authoritarian notion of the presidency are unique in the field and uniquely disqualifying.

    Trump’s popularity may simply be the product of a toxic brew of a polarized two-party system and nihilistic tactics on the campaign trail and Capitol Hill (such as shutting down the government and threatening to default on U.S. debts) that, either by design or in effect, have convinced many Americans that their government is irreparably broken and corrupt. But Trump isn’t the answer — he’s just a cynical manipulator playing on the very real frustrations of voters tired of a government that takes big, difficult problems and makes them intractable. Those voters still have time to choose a better standard-

    Reply
  7. Sterling Harris April 15, 2016

    You flock eagerly to a flamboyant, authoritarian billionaire fascist, and you feel you ought to be completely insulated from criticism while you do so. Everyone else ought to be subject to relentless and profane invective from an elderly Manhattan real estate heir, but you and he should be above reproach.

    Tell it like it is? I’ll tell you like it is: In my life I’ve never encountered a group of people more averse to being told how it is. Of course, you believe you’re entitled to this attitude because you’re “angry.” Your “anger” indulges you with the moral authority to take leave of your reason and your common sense. Your anger, you believe, places you beyond judgment, even as you attempt to drag this country into a future of (more) tyranny and cultism. You believe the rest of us ought to take your supposedly righteous rage into account while you refuse to take anything but your own infatuation with spectacle and celebrity into account. Whatever concerns we raise, including the ones I’m raising now, can be written off in an instant. “WE’RE TIRED OF POLITICS AS USUAL! WE’RE ANGRY!” And that’s supposed to be some kind of rhetorical hall pass, permitting you to do and say what you please unchallenged.

    Well let me be the first and perhaps the only to say this out loud, although millions of people share this sentiment quietly: I don’t care about your anger. There’s some more truth for you, friend. There’s some more “tellin’ it like it is.” Two can play at this game, you know. And the only difference is that I’m right.

    I couldn’t take your anger seriously even if I wanted to. After all, you say you’re angry that people are too afraid to speak their minds, but, as we’ve established, you don’t really want anyone but Donald Trump to speak his mind.

    You say you’re angry about the corruption in Washington, but you support a slimy swindler andfraudster who boasts of his bribery schemes and makes no apologies for shamelessly exploiting political corruption for personal gain.

    Reply
  8. Sterling Harris April 15, 2016

    You say you’re angry about illegal immigration, but you rally around a guy who supported amnesty as recently as 2013, employed illegal immigrants, and donated millions of dollars to open borders politicians like Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Hillary Clinton.

    You say you’re angry about the establishment, but you worship a candidate who said only a few weeks ago that “you got to be a little establishment” in order to get things done, and who admits he “was the establishment” right until he ran for president.

    You say you’re angry that Republicans won’t fight, but you hail as a warrior the same guy who says he’ll happily “work with the Democrats,” which probably explains why Sen. Harry Reid praised him and Jimmy Carter called him “malleable.” It is not uncommon for me to hear from Trump fans that they’re angry at “GOPe” Republicans for “cutting deals” and “compromising” in one breath, and in the very next that they want Trump because he’s really good at cutting deals and compromising.

    Right down the list, you are blithely embracing every single thing you say you’re so angry about. Trump is the very embodiment of corruption, deception, cowardice, and elitism. He is precisely the sort of man you supposedly detest. Trump is exploiting America’s frustration with men like Trump. Trump is running against Trump. You are voting for Trump because you hate Trump. You are angry at politicians because they act like Trump and make deals like Trump and go to cocktail parties with men like Trump and look down on the little guy like Trump and possess the integrity of Trump, and so you’re solution is to elect Trump. Your anger at Trump leads you to Trump. Perhaps this explains why you’re so worried about politicians who are “controlled by donors,” but you aren’t at all concerned about a politicians who is the very donor you didn’t want controlling the political process. “I’m sick of these donors influencing the government! I have an idea: let’s make one president!”

    Reply
  9. Sterling Harris April 15, 2016

    Trump is the very embodiment of corruption, deception, cowardice, and elitism.

    Share:It seems more like schizophrenia than anger. Aside from chronic mental illness, there are only two explanations for a person who avidly supports the continuation of a thing because he’s angry at that thing: either he’s fantastically stupid, or he’s not actually angry at all.

    Friend, I should tell you the most popular theory among non-Trump supporters is that you fall into the former category. When we talk to each other in private, almost everyone agrees you’re stupid. Again, you should, by your own words, hold me in the highest esteem for telling you this uncomfortable fact. People think you’re stupid, just as they thought about Barack Obama supporters in 2008.

    The parallels between the two groups are indeed profound, as exit polls attest. Once again, people are voting because “they want change,” unconcerned by the fact that the change is ambiguous, non-specific, and, in fact, not really ”change” at all. A lot of people, grasping for an explanation as to how voters might be suckered by the same shtick three times in a row, just chalk it up to stupidity.

    By the way, you should doubly love what I’m doing here because it appears very close to apophasis, which is a rhetorical device where the speaker coyly makes an accusation or insult in the context of denying or distancing himself from the unkind remark. “Many people believe my neighbor Jim is a thieving jerk who borrowed my garden hose last July and didn’t return it, but I’m not going to talk about it.” That kind of thing.

    It’s a strategy Trump employs all the time, and you always go along with it, like when he called Megyn Kelly a bimbo by saying “I refuse to call Megyn Kelly a bimbo because that would be politically incorrect.” Like clockwork, you insisted that he didn’t call Megyn Kelly a bimbo; he merely brought up the fact that he wouldcall her a bimbo if it weren’t so rude to do so.

    Well, in similar fashion, I’m not calling you stupid, I’m just saying that other people call you stupid. You should therefore defend me against any accusation that I’ve called you stupid, just as you would Trump. But the difference is that I’m not being coy here. I really don’t think you’re stupid. I certainly don’t think I’m any smarter than you. I subscribe to the second theory: I don’t believe you’re really all that angry.

    Your anger, to whatever extent it exists at all, is surface level. It’s a purely emotional experience, fed by a mob mentality. You’re angry in the way a rioter or looter is angry. Your temper might be flaring and your heart rate jumping and you might be filled with the uncontrollable urge to break a window, but underneath that anger is really something much closer to boredom and apathy. You don’t feel a real, intense, profound, deep and meaningful disgust at the corruption and malfeasance in Washington, because if you did there is simply no way you would support a man like Trump.

    Unless, like I said, you’re stupid. But you aren’t stupid, and a non-stupid person, a serious person, who truly, deeply, intensely loathes the current state of affairs, who genuinely desires that his country be revived for the sake of his children, would not be turning to a blustery, boorish reality TV character with a catchphrase and a fake tan for answers.

    I’m just telling it like it is here, friend. I’m telling you what’s on my mind. I’m being completely and painfully honest with you. I don’t believe your anger. I think you want a spectacle, not a solution. A celebrity, not a statesman. A circus performer, not a leader. I think you want to be entertained. I think you’re not taking this seriously enough. I think you’re intellectually lazy so you’ve accepted authoritarianism as a stand-in for strength. I think you’re following the trend of the day. I think you’re wrapped up in media hype.

    In other words, I think your anger, if it exists, is misplaced. You should be angry at yourself, because if this country falls finally and irrevocably into despotism, it’ll be your fault. You’ll have chosen it. You’ll have elected it and applauded it. That, my friend, is what makes me angry.

    And that’s just how it is.

    Reply
    1. Beethoven April 18, 2016

      98 percent of American voters are incapable of following the logic of your explanation.

      1. Sterling Harris April 18, 2016

        ON HERE TO VOICE AN OPINION FROM ONE AMERICAN WHO WILL VOTE IN ALL ELECTIONS

    2. Aaron_of_Portsmouth April 18, 2016

      I was reminded by of a Roman rhetorical style of presentation when you cleverly wrote ” ‘Many people believe my neighbor Jim is a thieving jerk who borrowed my garden hose last July and didn’t return it, but I’m not going to talk about it.’ That kind of thing. ”

      Do you know what the term is that describes that style???

      1. Sterling Harris April 18, 2016

        “[Rhetoric] seems to me then . . . to be a pursuit that is not a matter of art, but showing a shrewd, gallant spirit which has a natural bent for clever dealing with mankind, and I sum up its substance in the name flattery. . . . Well now, you have heard what I state rhetoric to be–the counterpart of cookery in the soul, acting here as that does on the body.”SOUNDS LIKE A COMPLEMENT.

        1. Aaron_of_Portsmouth April 19, 2016

          I was hoping you knew the name of that style where the early Roman senators would start off by saying something to the effect “… I would say that so-and-so was a schmuck, but I’m not going to say that…”

          That’s all. And yes, I was complimenting you on that phrasing you used.

  10. Low Bounty Contact April 15, 2016

    Interesing.

    Reply
  11. /sarcnado ☠ April 16, 2016

    Yep, them New York values on show.

    Reply
  12. Aaron_of_Portsmouth April 16, 2016

    Gosh, what a bummer. Sounds like a Rodney Dangerfield moment.

    Reply
    1. Sterling Harris April 18, 2016

      A LEGEND RODNEY DANGERFIELD THANKS FOR THE COMPLIMENT

  13. drdroad April 17, 2016

    Uhh, couldn’t we hear a word or two from that Sterling Harris guy??

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.