• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Trump Will Win the Nomination

bobknightfan said:
Is Cruz supposed to get a free ride for this?
Click to expand...

Well seeing as Cruz had nothing to do with the ad...yes.

Just another example of Trump's inability to control his actions or have any sense of decorum. I can't believe you actually are considering voting for such a clown.
 
For someone that hates citizens united, campaign finance, etc.. bkf has a tough time understanding that anyone can compile money and run any ad they would like about or against any candidate.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Well seeing as Cruz had nothing to do with the ad...yes.

Just another example of Trump's inability to control his actions or have any sense of decorum. I can't believe you actually are considering voting for such a clown.
Click to expand...

How do you know that Lyin' Ted didn't know about that ad? The ad mentioned him by name. If an ad directly mentions "you could vote for Ted Cruz", Cruz has to bear some responsibility for that ad. It's a total damned joke that an organization could spend millions of dollars on ads for a candidate and that candidate would have no responsibility for the content in those ads.
 
Well we have no idea if he actually knew about it or not, but it appears to have been coordinated by one of his Super Pacs that cannot legally have contact with him. I mean we know that's a farce, but we really have no idea. Sounds like your beef is, again, with Citizen's United.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Well we have no idea if he actually knew about it or not, but it appears to have been coordinated by one of his Super Pacs that cannot legally have contact with him. I mean we know that's a farce, but we really have no idea. Sounds like your beef is, again, with Citizen's United.
Click to expand...

I understand your legal points...but I am trying to insert a little common sense into the situation. You admitted that this whole situation we have now with Citizens' United is a farce. Maybe Cruz cannot be held legally accountable....but the voters can decide to hold him accountable. And that's where this is ultimately going to be decided.

And that's what many people do not yet understand about the Trump phenomenon. The voters have had enough of this bullshit. They have reached their tipping point. And before it's over, I think many of the Bernie supporters will feel the same way that the Trump supporters feel. Burn the sonofabitch to the ground, if that's what it takes.
 
Last edited:
They've had enough bullshit with underhanded tactics from Cruz so they vote for the guy who just tweets about topics themselves and doesn't pretend he isn't endorsing it? Makes limited sense.

I tend to agree with ChrisL's assessment of your mistaking populism for votes
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
They've had enough bullshit with underhanded tactics from Cruz so they vote for the guy who just tweets about topics themselves and doesn't pretend he isn't endorsing it? Makes limited sense.

I tend to agree with ChrisL's assessment of your mistaking populism for votes
Click to expand...

They aren't pro-Trump. They're anti-Cruz.
 
bobknightfan said:
How do you know that Lyin' Ted didn't know about that ad? The ad mentioned him by name. If an ad directly mentions "you could vote for Ted Cruz", Cruz has to bear some responsibility for that ad. It's a total damned joke that an organization could spend millions of dollars on ads for a candidate and that candidate would have no responsibility for the content in those ads.
Click to expand...

I could run an ad tomorrow that says "If you don't like Muslims, write in [BKF's real name] for President."

Would you feel it's fair to attribute that anti-Muslim sentiment to you, because your name is in the ad?
 
DistrictDeacon said:
I could run an ad tomorrow that says "If you don't like Muslims, write in [BKF's real name] for President."

Would you feel it's fair to attribute that anti-Muslim sentiment to you, because your name is in the ad?
Click to expand...

Thanks John Roberts.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
I could run an ad tomorrow that says "If you don't like Muslims, write in [BKF's real name] for President."

Would you feel it's fair to attribute that anti-Muslim sentiment to you, because your name is in the ad?
Click to expand...

If I didn't come out forcefully against it and publically order the people responsible for it to cease & desist with such tactics, yes.

"Qui tacet consentiret"

As numbers has correctly noted, the entire system of super pacs is a damned farce against democracy.
 
bobknightfan said:
If I didn't come out forcefully against it and publically order the people responsible for it to cease & desist with such tactics, yes.

"Qui tacet consentiret"

As numbers has correctly noted, the entire system of super pacs is a damned farce against democracy.
Click to expand...

Like this?

“That ad was completely inappropriate and we had nothing to do with it,” Cruz told The Daily Beast. “It wasn’t our campaign. It wasn’t even a super PAC affiliated with us in anyway. It was a totally separate group. I don’t know the person who did it—we have no involvement with them whatsoever.”
 
The only quoted source in the Cruz mistress story is Roger Stone, a long term Trump associate. Stone went to work for Nixon at age 20 in 1972 and was "fired" by the Trump campaign last Summer. Liz Mair, who runs the Stop Trump Super PAC, briefly worked for Walker's campaign. Far more likely that Trump's campaign coordinated with the article than Cruz's campaign coordinated with the ad. One act is perfectly legal and the other isn't. Both are ridiculously scummy. We get exactly the candidates we deserve precisely because of those scorched earth tactics.

Trump offered to pay legal fees for the old guy who cold cocked a protestor after video surfaced of the guy saying he might kill the protestor if he saw him again. Trump was OK with the assault because the protestor had flipped the bird to the crowd. Trump also defended the Black guy who beat the crap out of a protestor on seeing soneone wearing a KKK hood. If so, why didn't the guy beat the shut out of the woman wearing the hood? Trump tweeted out the photo slamming Cruz at 12:30 AM the week of a terrorist attack. Wasn't up late thinking about America's safety. Can't stand Cruz, but that doesn't mean Trump isn't wildly erratic too.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Like this?

“That ad was completely inappropriate and we had nothing to do with it,” Cruz told The Daily Beast. “It wasn’t our campaign. It wasn’t even a super PAC affiliated with us in anyway. It was a totally separate group. I don’t know the person who did it—we have no involvement with them whatsoever.”
Click to expand...

No, that's not enough. Cruz can say that one time in a corner somewhere and be winking at the same time. He needs to say it repeatedly to the national media, not just whoever the "Daily Beast" is (I've never even heard of it).....and he should have said it when he was ranting against Trump with his "sniveling coward" soliloquy. The two ads should have been tied together every time Cruz brought up the subject.....and tied together by the media every time the media brought the subject up. The first one begat the second one. Don't just talk about the 2nd one. That's like throwing a flag in a football game against the player who retaliates and ignoring the guy who started the fight.
 
Last edited:
Once Amanda Carpenter gets off her high horse, people would like to know if she has had affairs with any of the other candidates, or if she is planning on doing so. Inquiring minds want to know.
 
bobknightfan said:
No, that's not enough. Cruz can say that one time in a corner somewhere and be winking at the same time. He needs to say it repeatedly to the national media, not just whoever the "Daily Beast" is (I've never even heard of it).....and he should have said it when he was ranting against Trump with his "sniveling coward" soliloquy. The two ads should have been tied together every time Cruz brought up the subject.....and tied together by the media every time the media brought the subject up. The first one begat the second one. Don't just talk about the 2nd one. That's like throwing a flag in a football game against the player who retaliates and ignoring the guy who started the fight.
Click to expand...

I'm sure he'll take your advice into account going forward.
 
bobknightfan said:
No, that's not enough. Cruz can say that one time in a corner somewhere and be winking at the same time. He needs to say it repeatedly to the national media, not just whoever the "Daily Beast" is (I've never even heard of it).....and he should have said it when he was ranting against Trump with his "sniveling coward" soliloquy. The two ads should have been tied together every time Cruz brought up the subject.....and tied together by the media every time the media brought the subject up. The first one begat the second one. Don't just talk about the 2nd one. That's like throwing a flag in a football game against the player who retaliates and ignoring the guy who started the fight.
Click to expand...

Then let's talk about both. Why are you not ripping Donald Trump for the exact same thing?
 
Who hasn't heard of The Daily Beast by now. It's been around for quite awhile.
 
bobknightfan said:
Michigan & Wisconsin would also be in play.....and the Democrats are not going to carry Arizona. I will concede Colorado & Nevada....and New Mexico was already unwinnable by the Republicans, no matter who their candidate was.
Click to expand...

You admitting being pro-Trump yet, Bud?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top