Opinion of Ted Cruz's convention speech

[Fuzzy Bear]

Cruz's move was smarmy and dishonest.  Passive-aggressiveness at its worst.

People could understand why Cruz could not endorse Trump.  It's highly personal, and most Republicans would have been OK with Cruz not endorsing.  He, alone, would have gotten a pass had he not done what he did tonight.

Instead, Ted Cruz crapped on a lot of downballot Republicans.  A party chair was screaming at him afterward, and why not?  Cruz had made his job that much harder, because he was, in fact, urging Republicans not to vote for Republicans if their consciences would not permit them.  He encouraged Republicans to vote as independents, and he did it at the Republican National Convention of all places.

The last time I saw a major Presidential hopeful get a speaking slot at his party's convention and NOT endorse the ticket was George Wallace in 1972.  And that was Wallace, a guy who was not considered a "mainstream" national Democrat; the Democrats knew what they were getting, and they were happy that Wallace, while disagreeing with the main planks of the party platform, never trashed McGovern.  Cruz, however, did a "Neener, Neener, Neener!" move; he WANTED the New York delegation, or somebody in the crowd, to get the point that Cruz wasn't endorsing Trump and was eating up a huge swath of TV time to get that point across.  He WANTED the boos; his response to the boos was one of, "You finally got it!".  What he WON'T get is the 2020 GOP Presidential nomination.  Indeed, he may well have a tough primary fight for renomination in 2018.  He crapped on downballot GOP candidates.  And he crapped in his mess kit as well.

[Fuzzy Bear]

No one seems to think that the nominee in 2020 will be Donald Trump.
Anyway, I think Ted Cruz simply refuses to be a phony. 

You can "not be a phony" and meet the minimum "I'm voting for the ticket." requirement of party loyalty.  I could care less personally as to whether or not Cruz endorses Trump, because Trump's campaign is less endorsement-dependent than any campaign I have ever seen.  But as a prognosticator (to the degree that I can call myself that), Cruz made a HUGE error.  The "vote your conscience" mantra hurts Republicans other than Trump, and that is not lost on Republican regulars whose partisanship is not singular.  Cruz went about this all wrong, and he's going to pay a huge price.

[Fuzzy Bear]

No one seems to think that the nominee in 2020 will be Donald Trump.
Anyway, I think Ted Cruz simply refuses to be a phony. 

You can "not be a phony" and meet the minimum "I'm voting for the ticket." requirement of party loyalty.  I could care less personally as to whether or not Cruz endorses Trump, because Trump's campaign is less endorsement-dependent than any campaign I have ever seen.  But as a prognosticator (to the degree that I can call myself that), Cruz made a HUGE error.  The "vote your conscience" mantra hurts Republicans other than Trump, and that is not lost on Republican regulars whose partisanship is not singular.  Cruz went about this all wrong, and he's going to pay a huge price.

Being loyal to a party rather than your own beliefs is being a phony.

That may be true if you are an individual voter, but not when you are a partisan politician.  Politics in America is very much a Team Sport, and most voters who identify with one major party or another expect their candidates to be loyal to the national ticket.  I cannot think of a single major party candidate in my lifetime who, up until their nomination as President or Vice President, was loyal to their party's national ticket.  The closest to this is George McGovern, who was a delegate to the Progressive Party's convention in 1948 that nominated Henry A. Wallace, and McGovern wasn't an elected official at that time.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Cant stand the man but it was a total Freedom Speech and took balls !

Would you say the same if Jim Webb were to speak before the Democratic National Convention and tells the delegates to "vote their consciences"?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Great speech.  One of the best.

Why should Cruz endorse a candidate who viscously attacked and maligned his wife?

Did McCain endorse W in 2000?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yep.  Ted Cruz has made a political living on being the bad boy.  He went into the Senate with a chip on his shoulder, managed to alienate pretty much everyone in the party, and somehow emerged as the last best hope of the establishment to stop Trump.  This speech is Cruz being Cruz.  He's not going anywhere, and he will probably be a folk hero to conservatives when this election is over.

John McCain endorsed George W. Bush in 2000 (A) before the convention, (B) unequivocally, and (C) repeatedly.  I remember McCain once getting irritated with the press before the 2000 convention, and asking the press how many times he had to make that clear.  He then said to the reporters, "I endorse Governor Bush.  I endorse Governor Bush.  I endorse Governor Bush.  I endorse Governor Bush . . ." sarcastically, to make his point that he supported Bush and had already made it clear.

Those who think Cruz has a bright future after publicly refusing to endorse the Presidential candidate in the way he did seriously underestimate the importance of regularity in supporting one's party's Presidential ticket in politics.  The end of the seniority system in Congress ensures that a Representative or Senator that bolts the Presidential ticket has a tough time getting committee assignments worth a crap.  The majority of Republicans DO back Trump, and Cruz made their row harder to hoe.  

Then, too, Cruz's entreaty to "vote your conscience" applied to candidates up and down the ballot; it was not limited to the Presidential race.  This point was not lost on me, and was not lost on a large number of party regulars whose job it was to shepherd an entire slate of candidates to victory.  Ted was too cute by half, and he'll pay for it.  I wouldn't rule out David Dewhurst in a rematch.