Cruz is incapable of winning a general election, & Trump is a stronger candidate

[Vosem]

As demonstrated by polling.

[Mike Thick]

I wonder how many people won't click on the link, and consequently actually think you changed your mind.

[Clark Kent]

Even if it's true, I don't care. I'd rather lose with Cruz or Kasich or Romney or whoever than nominate trump, even if he wins. Of course, the link isn't actually saying this, or anything we didn't already know.

[DemPGH]

And one thing that's been very, very consistent is that candidates less likely to receive a nomination run stronger in these general election polls. I remember not too long ago when Carson ran very strong in general election polls. I mean, there's a reason why they can't win their own party! They're not strong - Cruz, Carson, etc. I don't know why they get this "bump" in general election hypotheticals.

[Xing]

Vosem, didn't you get the memo? Trump just won NY, which not only means that he's now a lock for the nomination, but he's also magically become much more electable than Cruz!

[Coolface Sock #42069]

I just knew that link was going to be a rickroll.

[Clark Kent]

And one thing that's been very, very consistent is that candidates less likely to receive a nomination run stronger in these general election polls. I remember not too long ago when Carson ran very strong in general election polls. I mean, there's a reason why they can't win their own party! They're not strong - Cruz, Carson, etc. I don't know why they get this "bump" in general election hypotheticals.

Probably because while they're too moderate to win their party's nomination, they're moderate enough to win in the general election.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

And one thing that's been very, very consistent is that candidates less likely to receive a nomination run stronger in these general election polls. I remember not too long ago when Carson ran very strong in general election polls. I mean, there's a reason why they can't win their own party! They're not strong - Cruz, Carson, etc. I don't know why they get this "bump" in general election hypotheticals.

Probably because while they're too moderate to win their party's nomination, they're moderate enough to win in the general election.

Or because they don't receive the same level of scrutiny as the frontrunner.

[MK]

And one thing that's been very, very consistent is that candidates less likely to receive a nomination run stronger in these general election polls. I remember not too long ago when Carson ran very strong in general election polls. I mean, there's a reason why they can't win their own party! They're not strong - Cruz, Carson, etc. I don't know why they get this "bump" in general election hypotheticals.

Probably because while they're too moderate to win their party's nomination, they're moderate enough to win in the general election.

Or because they don't receive the same level of scrutiny as the frontrunner.

This.   If Kasich and Cruz got hammered every single day on their record those numbers would quickly change.   People when asked about candidates are normally not all that informed (its true voters have short attention spans) so they only give opinion on whats current.  Right now all they know is TRUMP said this or TRUMP is this etc.. .    Nobody knows much about Cruz or what he stands for when actually hes more ideology extreme then Trump.   

That said Cruz has that EV line of 190ish and its hard to see him expanding that.  He doesn't have the personality to win outside of his narrow base support.   Kasich is just being rejected by the GOP voters hes not a game changer.  Kasich could be elected and nothing would change for the next 4 to 8 years ... NOTHING would.   

[Leinad]

Saying that Trump is more electable than Cruz is like saying that dirt tastes better than turd.

Whether it's true or not, it's irrelevant because both will be destroyed in November, along with any Republican (because two-thirds of the party will hate any nominee).

[MK]

Saying that Trump is more electable than Cruz is like saying that dirt tastes better than turd.

Whether it's true or not, it's irrelevant because both will be destroyed in November, along with any Republican (because two-thirds of the party will hate any nominee).

Yeah because Hillary Clinton is such a strong candidate that everybody wants to vote for. 

[IceSpear]

Saying that Trump is more electable than Cruz is like saying that dirt tastes better than turd.

Whether it's true or not, it's irrelevant because both will be destroyed in November, along with any Republican (because two-thirds of the party will hate any nominee).

Yeah because Hillary Clinton is such a strong candidate that everybody wants to vote for. 

Glad to see you've seen the light.

[Wisconsin+17]

Cruz is a far stronger candidate than Trump. All the polls have consistently shown Trump losing a significant portion of the GOP base.

[MK]

Saying that Trump is more electable than Cruz is like saying that dirt tastes better than turd.

Whether it's true or not, it's irrelevant because both will be destroyed in November, along with any Republican (because two-thirds of the party will hate any nominee).

Yeah because Hillary Clinton is such a strong candidate that everybody wants to vote for. 

Glad to see you've seen the light.

I was being sarcastic. 

[Mr. Morden]

And one thing that's been very, very consistent is that candidates less likely to receive a nomination run stronger in these general election polls.

That doesn't seem to be "very, very consistent".  As recently as 2012, you had a frontrunner (Romney) who did better than his Republican rivals in GE matchups against Obama.

[Angel of Death]

I think Cruz doing better than Trump in head-to-head match-ups right now could be explained by him having a higher floor of support.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Cruz triggers all the cultural and ideological red flags with both higher end and downscale voters who share one commonality, a secular world outlook.

Trump does not.

To the extent that Trump is a weaker candidate, it is because he lacks discipline and is an eccentric candidate ot say the least. To the extent Cruz has problems, it is because there are voters who would vote for a Republican, but not for an ideologue

Trump's problems can be fixed up to the extent that he is willing to behave himself. It is behavioral and thus not hard wired. Cruz's ceiling is hard coded, rooted in ideology and the candidate's own inflexibility.

I would much rather take my chance on the one that can solve his problems, even if he opts not to than the one who would gladly go down with the perfectionist Conservative ship, rather than win and achieve results. That is not a success for conservativism that is self aggrandizing martyrdom that will doom us to defeat on life, guns and many other important issues.

[Fuzzy Bear]

A good portion of the negatives about Trump come from Republicans.  These are Republicans who are partisan, but who (rightly) see Trump as being the instrument of re-positioning the GOP on several key issues, the most important of which is trade.  Here, they are vested; they are free traders who benefit from the trade issue, and don't want to see the GOP become a protectionist party.  

Why is that?  It's mainly because the GOP is the Investor Class party.  The Investor Class wants return for their monies, and they don't care if they have to eliminate thousands of jobs in Indiana (as Carrier is doing right now) and increase profits by moving to Mexico.  That's what THEY stand for, and they are a major portion of the opposition to Trump.  

Some people here ridiculed my assertions of last year that trade was going to be an issue in this campaign.  It's turning out that trade is one of the LEADING issues in this campaign; it's the issue that's DRIVING the Trump campaign (and, to some degree, the Sanders campaign).  Why this fact should surprise folks is beyond me; it's long overdue.  When faced with Trump v. Clinton, this investor class will have a tough choice to make.  

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A good portion of the negatives about Trump come from Republicans.  These are Republicans who are partisan, but who (rightly) see Trump as being the instrument of re-positioning the GOP on several key issues, the most important of which is trade.  Here, they are vested; they are free traders who benefit from the trade issue, and don't want to see the GOP become a protectionist party.  

Why is that?  It's mainly because the GOP is the Investor Class party.  The Investor Class wants return for their monies, and they don't care if they have to eliminate thousands of jobs in Indiana (as Carrier is doing right now) and increase profits by moving to Mexico.  That's what THEY stand for, and they are a major portion of the opposition to Trump.  

Some people here ridiculed my assertions of last year that trade was going to be an issue in this campaign.  It's turning out that trade is one of the LEADING issues in this campaign; it's the issue that's DRIVING the Trump campaign (and, to some degree, the Sanders campaign).  Why this fact should surprise folks is beyond me; it's long overdue.  When faced with Trump v. Clinton, this investor class will have a tough choice to make.  

I called it in 2012 during discussions of Romney's proposals to go after Chinese currency manipulation. If nothing was done, there would be a populist uprising that was full on protectionist.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/SENATE/2012/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=29120120820108

Final result 39-56 or something like that.

[SillyAmerican]

A good portion of the negatives about Trump come from Republicans.  These are Republicans who are partisan, but who (rightly) see Trump as being the instrument of re-positioning the GOP on several key issues, the most important of which is trade.  Here, they are vested; they are free traders who benefit from the trade issue, and don't want to see the GOP become a protectionist party.  

Why is that?  It's mainly because the GOP is the Investor Class party.  The Investor Class wants return for their monies, and they don't care if they have to eliminate thousands of jobs in Indiana (as Carrier is doing right now) and increase profits by moving to Mexico.  That's what THEY stand for, and they are a major portion of the opposition to Trump.  

Some people here ridiculed my assertions of last year that trade was going to be an issue in this campaign.  It's turning out that trade is one of the LEADING issues in this campaign; it's the issue that's DRIVING the Trump campaign (and, to some degree, the Sanders campaign).  Why this fact should surprise folks is beyond me; it's long overdue.  When faced with Trump v. Clinton, this investor class will have a tough choice to make.  

Cruz triggers all the cultural and ideological red flags with both higher end and downscale voters who share one commonality, a secular world outlook.

Trump does not.

To the extent that Trump is a weaker candidate, it is because he lacks discipline and is an eccentric candidate ot say the least. To the extent Cruz has problems, it is because there are voters who would vote for a Republican, but not for an ideologue

Trump's problems can be fixed up to the extent that he is willing to behave himself. It is behavioral and thus not hard wired. Cruz's ceiling is hard coded, rooted in ideology and the candidate's own inflexibility.

I would much rather take my chance on the one that can solve his problems, even if he opts not to than the one who would gladly go down with the perfectionist Conservative ship, rather than win and achieve results. That is not a success for conservativism that is self aggrandizing martyrdom that will doom us to defeat on life, guns and many other important issues.

I agree strongly with both Fuzzy and NC Yank. Trade policies will be key this cycle, and Cruz is much too rooted in ideology to be an effective GE candidate.

[Torie]

They are both losers. Thank God. The end.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump's gonna get blown out for the same reason they always get blown out. You don't out-Democrat the Democrats. Ever. When's the last time that policy actually... worked?

Trump's been all over the map. In an election where conservatives need vote number 5 on the supremes... are we really gonna turn out for Trump?

[Likely Voter]

Former McCain staffer Nicole Wallace said something interesting on this topic today on MTP:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And on CNN, Trump son (Don Jr) accused the GOP elites of the same thing, saying

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Will we see this notion of "let's lose with Cruz" become the new rallying cry within GOP elites?  Is this the new "Vote for the crook, it's important" ?

[Wisconsin+17]

Right, because Donald Trump Jr. is a reliable source.