Pro-Cruz PAC slams Rubio in Iowa ad

[Saint Milei]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/11/06/why-super-pacs-sometimes-terrify-the-campaigns-they-support/

it begins

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

How long before we see super-PACs whose real job is to discredit the candidate they support? (Assuming we're not seeing that already. The 'Sandy Hook' ad was pretty awful.)

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Whatever happened to the strategy of only going after Clinton in order to avoid giving Dems and the media talking points against the nominee like they did in 2012?

[Xing]

Whatever happened to the strategy of only going after Clinton in order to avoid giving Dems and the media talking points against the nominee like they did in 2012?

In case it wasn't already clear, they haven't learned anything from 2012.

[Bull Moose Base]

Whatever happened to the strategy of only going after Clinton in order to avoid giving Dems and the media talking points against the nominee like they did in 2012?

It never existed.  Campaigns attack primary opponents approximately 100% of the time. Even Bernie Sanders, who doesn't seem like he wants to be president all that much, got his hands dirty. In the age of SuperPACs, it's easier for guys like Cruz and Rubio pretending to be magnanimous while attacks are leveled on their respective opponents but it's also bulls--t. That said, it's clear Bush should have done a similar thing instead of his botched attack on Rubio. Instead he walked into a trap and allowed Rubio to flatten him while pretending to be above attacks. There was a way for Bush to land a glove on Rubio in that exchange but he botched it.

[bagelman]

oh brother

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Whatever happened to the strategy of only going after Clinton in order to avoid giving Dems and the media talking points against the nominee like they did in 2012?

In case it wasn't already clear, they haven't learned anything from 2012.

Clearly. The "vulture capitalist" attacks literally paved the way for leftist attacks in the general election campaign.

I don't get it. These campaign people are supposed to be smart. They are paid millions to be smart. How can they be so dumb?

[RINO Tom]

Whatever happened to the strategy of only going after Clinton in order to avoid giving Dems and the media talking points against the nominee like they did in 2012?

In case it wasn't already clear, they haven't learned anything from 2012.

Clearly. The "vulture capitalist" attacks literally paved the way for leftist attacks in the general election campaign.

I don't get it. These campaign people are supposed to be smart. They are paid millions to be smart. How can they be so dumb?

Some people in our party (who ironically refer to themselves as the "true conservatives") have become so mad at "the establishment" that they literally have adopted Democratic talking points to vent their anger on things like free trade and "corporate welfare" and generally attacking the business community/Wall Street.  I'd laugh if it weren't so embarrassing and sad.

We need a serious lesson on Reagan's 11th Commandment.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Whatever happened to the strategy of only going after Clinton in order to avoid giving Dems and the media talking points against the nominee like they did in 2012?

In case it wasn't already clear, they haven't learned anything from 2012.

Clearly. The "vulture capitalist" attacks literally paved the way for leftist attacks in the general election campaign.

I don't get it. These campaign people are supposed to be smart. They are paid millions to be smart. How can they be so dumb?

Some people in our party (who ironically refer to themselves as the "true conservatives") have become so mad at "the establishment" that they literally have adopted Democratic talking points to vent their anger on thins like free trade and "corporate welfare" and generally attacking the business community/Wall Street.  I'd laugh if it weren't so embarrassing and sad.

We need a serious lesson on Reagan's 11th Commandment.

That lesson may well manifest itself as a slaughtering at the hands of the leftists.

[dudeabides]

Ted Cruz is not a leader, he is running for President for attention. Marco Rubio has actually tried to accomplish something in Washington, he has things he's for and not just things he's against and unlike Ted Cruz, he has a strong grasp of the issues.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How long before we see super-PACs whose real job is to discredit the candidate they support? (Assuming we're not seeing that already. The 'Sandy Hook' ad was pretty awful.)

There's some Bernie SuperPAC that certainly isn't doing anything to help Bernie. Probably just grifters.

[Maxwell]

Ted Cruz is not a leader, he is running for President for attention. Marco Rubio has actually tried to accomplish something in Washington, he has things he's for and not just things he's against and unlike Ted Cruz, he has a strong grasp of the issues.

Are you really saying Ted Cruz does not have a strong grasp of the issues? I would argue he probably has the strongest grasp on the issues of anyone in the GOP field. He just knows when to give a wonkish speech and when not to.

[dudeabides]

Ted Cruz is not a leader, he is running for President for attention. Marco Rubio has actually tried to accomplish something in Washington, he has things he's for and not just things he's against and unlike Ted Cruz, he has a strong grasp of the issues.

Are you really saying Ted Cruz does not have a strong grasp of the issues? I would argue he probably has the strongest grasp on the issues of anyone in the GOP field. He just knows when to give a wonkish speech and when not to.

Ted Cruz's stance on illegal immigration shows a complete ignorance about the issue. Clearly, he cares more about getting the votes of tea party nativists than listening to the facts. The fact is, if we do nothing about illegal immigration, we will continue to have millions of people in the shadows not paying taxes and potentially more people coming here. However, if we start mass deportations, we will be spending $140 billion at a minimum, we'll violate the civil liberties of legal immigrants and those born here who are hispanic, and resources that should be used tracking down violent people would instead be used going after people who, while they broke the law, have not committed violent crimes. Marco Rubio offered a plan that I don't agree with completely, but I agree with most of it. There has to be a middle ground, Ted Cruz does not support a middle ground. He supports doing nothing or mass deportations, both of which are more costly to taxpayers and more harmful to our security and civil liberties.

Ted Cruz believes that we should use the constitution to ban same-sex marriage. This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the 10th amendment and a complete disrespect for the constitution in it's entirety. Once we start using the constitution for political purposes, we throw out the intent of the constitution.

Perhaps Cruz's biggest misunderstanding of public policy is Common Core. He says we should repeal common core, common core is adopted on a state by state basis and therefore, the President has no power over it. That is, unless he wants to federalize education. This is a state issue, but I guess Cruz would rather win the votes of tea partiers with no kids in public schools who oppose common core than gather the facts.