Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 21, 2019, 03:29:35 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  2016 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: TJ in Oregon, VirginiŠ)
| | |-+  Ted Cruz - Biggest Loser of 2016
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: Ted Cruz - Biggest Loser of 2016  (Read 3000 times)
Fuzzy Bear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,556
United States


View Profile WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 19, 2018, 12:18:29 pm »

In thinking of Ted Cruz, it dawned on me that no one, not even Jeb!, lost the amount of star power that Ted Cruz lost in 2016.  Maybe it's just my perception, but Cruz seemed to go from the predominant political face of "Movement Conservatives" and "Religious Conservatives", as well as the intellectual leader of those folks on the political front, to a mere backbencher from Texas who's facing a likely re-election that's not quite in the bag. 

How'd that happen?  That didn't happen when Bob Taft lost to Eisenhower in 1952 (although Taft died soon afterward).  That didn't happen to Goldwater.  That didn't happen to Bob Dole or Howard Baker in 1980.  That didn't happen to Al Gore or Dick Gephardt in 1988 or to Bob Dole in 1988.  But it sure happened to Cruz, did it not?

Most of the time, I think the worst thing a pol can do is not support his party's national ticket.  Even if all you say in public is "I'm going to vote for the national ticket.", qualifying that with a statement that you won't campaign for the ticket, that'll get you by.  But Ted Cruz's case was different.  Not only did Trump go Full Bore Donnie on Cruz (the "Lyin' Ted moniker can still be heard), he went out and suggested that the man's father was linked to the Kennedy Assassination!  Such a thing would normally allow someone a pass on this issue.  Cruz speaking at the RNC telling folks to "vote their consciences" was certainly an ambushed non-endorsement of Trump from the podium.  Yet, in the end, Cruz endorsed Trump and even campaigned a bit for him, before fading out.

I'm convinced that Ted Cruz's loss of stature is due to becoming the ultimate cuck and campaigning for a man who implicated his father in the Kennedy Assassination.  Would you campaign for someone who did that to YOUR Dad or YOUR Mom?  I wouldn't, and you wouldn't, either, but Ted Cruz did, and that has always been a head-scratcher for me.

Am I right in this assessment?  DIscuss.
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,509


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2018, 12:44:02 pm »

Not really, people need to remember where Cruz polled back in early 2015, he polled in the bottom rung, the fact that he was able to rise to second place is a testament to his ability. The biggest losers were the establishment candidates Jeb/Rubio/Walker, this category under-performed expectations, Cruz and his Conservative wing over-performed.  By the way, Kasich and his moderate wing, also over-performed.

Logged
Fuzzy Bear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,556
United States


View Profile WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2018, 01:02:25 pm »

Not really, people need to remember where Cruz polled back in early 2015, he polled in the bottom rung, the fact that he was able to rise to second place is a testament to his ability. The biggest losers were the establishment candidates Jeb/Rubio/Walker, this category under-performed expectations, Cruz and his Conservative wing over-performed.  By the way, Kasich and his moderate wing, also over-performed.

At the beginning of the 2015 cycle, I viewed Kasich as the most electable Republican, moreso than Jeb or Rubio, and there was polling data to back that up, but no one seemed to see this. 

Kasich really turned out to be a bust.  He was the runner-up only because he didn't drop out.  Marco Rubio got more delegates than Kasich.
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,509


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2018, 01:10:13 pm »

Not really, people need to remember where Cruz polled back in early 2015, he polled in the bottom rung, the fact that he was able to rise to second place is a testament to his ability. The biggest losers were the establishment candidates Jeb/Rubio/Walker, this category under-performed expectations, Cruz and his Conservative wing over-performed.  By the way, Kasich and his moderate wing, also over-performed.

At the beginning of the 2015 cycle, I viewed Kasich as the most electable Republican, moreso than Jeb or Rubio, and there was polling data to back that up, but no one seemed to see this.  

Kasich really turned out to be a bust.  He was the runner-up only because he didn't drop out.  Marco Rubio got more delegates than Kasich.

He was a runner-up because he won his home state, while Rubio lost his, there were a number of states in which Rubio came in fourth behind Kasich.
Logged
FalloutBoy97
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 73
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -5.92


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2018, 03:28:56 pm »

I don't think Cruz's national aspirations are dead, but the 2016 campaign did erode his credibility. Voters like candidates with a consistent message that is easy to categorize, and Cruz's waffling and indecisiveness in his approach to Trump muddied his previously untouchable credentials.

He initially opposed Trump's Muslim registry, claiming that he "didn't like government registries of U.S. citizens." As the Trump campaign gathered steam he pulled a full 180 and backed heavy policing of Muslim neighborhoods. He made a high-profile point of refusing to endorse Trump, and then proceeded to do it anyways. He claimed the moral and religious high ground, yet later endorsed and campaigned for a man who isn't even biblically literate and has been married three times. Some politicians can get away with flip-flopping, but not a guy whose entire brand was built on his bulletproof, uncompromising conservative principles.

In short, yes.
Logged
UWS
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,465


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2018, 03:57:25 pm »

I don't think Cruz's national aspirations are dead, but the 2016 campaign did erode his credibility. Voters like candidates with a consistent message that is easy to categorize, and Cruz's waffling and indecisiveness in his approach to Trump muddied his previously untouchable credentials.

He initially opposed Trump's Muslim registry, claiming that he "didn't like government registries of U.S. citizens." As the Trump campaign gathered steam he pulled a full 180 and backed heavy policing of Muslim neighborhoods. He made a high-profile point of refusing to endorse Trump, and then proceeded to do it anyways. He claimed the moral and religious high ground, yet later endorsed and campaigned for a man who isn't even biblically literate and has been married three times. Some politicians can get away with flip-flopping, but not a guy whose entire brand was built on his bulletproof, uncompromising conservative principles.

In short, yes.

If he loses to Beto OíRourke in November as he is now leading by only 3 percentage points, his aspirations will be likely to die.
Logged
FalloutBoy97
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 73
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -5.92


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2018, 05:04:30 pm »

I don't think Cruz's national aspirations are dead, but the 2016 campaign did erode his credibility. Voters like candidates with a consistent message that is easy to categorize, and Cruz's waffling and indecisiveness in his approach to Trump muddied his previously untouchable credentials.

He initially opposed Trump's Muslim registry, claiming that he "didn't like government registries of U.S. citizens." As the Trump campaign gathered steam he pulled a full 180 and backed heavy policing of Muslim neighborhoods. He made a high-profile point of refusing to endorse Trump, and then proceeded to do it anyways. He claimed the moral and religious high ground, yet later endorsed and campaigned for a man who isn't even biblically literate and has been married three times. Some politicians can get away with flip-flopping, but not a guy whose entire brand was built on his bulletproof, uncompromising conservative principles.

In short, yes.

If he loses to Beto OíRourke in November as he is now leading by only 3 percentage points, his aspirations will be likely to die.

Forgive me if I am skeptical of that poll. Yes, Cruz is not particularly likable, nor is 2018 shaping up to be a good year for republicans, but he is an incumbent republican senator running in a state that is trending democratic but is still republican for the time being.
Logged
Progressive Pessimist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,854
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.71, S: -7.65

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2018, 07:20:25 pm »

Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, and Scott Walker were some of the most talked about GOP nominees before the primaries, and they all fell flat on their face. They are probably all the biggest losers. Bush may very well be the least relevant at this point, so he wins overall by a nose.
Logged
Justice Blair
Blair2015
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,091
United Kingdom


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 22, 2018, 08:20:36 am »

I wouldn't put Cruz in the same league as Taft/Goldwater/Gore/Dole etc because all those people were popular within the Senate, and considered relative titans in their party. Most of the GOP in Washington hates Cruz, because Cruz uses his Senate Seat as a stick to bash the national GOP. He did it against Dewhurst in 2012 and then closed down the government with Obamacare.

I think the campaign exposed that Cruz really is an unlikable Jerk. The whole thing with his children not wanting to kiss him, the bacon on the gun,  trying to push Huckabee off stage with Kim Davis, lying about Ben Carson, 'vote your conscience' and then endorsing Trump.

Generally politicians who are ideological like Cruz need to be extremely likable. Reagan and Obama are the most obvious (but there's a host of lesser pols like Edwards/Rubio who use their backstory to justify more 'radical' policies). Cruz is the fatal combination of a social Conservative, a Tea-Bagger and a spineless, sleaze.

I think the 2016 campaign exposed this; but their traits that always existed.

The irony is that whilst he ran an awful Campaign, it's going to perfectly possible for Marco Rubio to run for President in 2024, and win. Even though Ted's 2016 campaign was great, he's still a sh**t product to sell
Logged
kelestian
Full Member
***
Posts: 243
Russian Federation
Political Matrix
E: 3.68, S: -3.22

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 22, 2018, 09:16:05 am »

His face, his speeches, his behaviour (even for me - i like social conservatives) ... he would never won GE. And somehow Cruz still managed to score the second place in primaries.

Rubio and Clinton are the biggest losers
Logged
Mr. Morden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38,777
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: April 22, 2018, 09:51:40 am »

Presumably whoever would have won the nomination in the event that Trump hadn't run turned out to be the biggest loser.
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,509


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: April 22, 2018, 12:09:22 pm »

I wouldn't put Cruz in the same league as Taft/Goldwater/Gore/Dole etc because all those people were popular within the Senate, and considered relative titans in their party. Most of the GOP in Washington hates Cruz, because Cruz uses his Senate Seat as a stick to bash the national GOP. He did it against Dewhurst in 2012 and then closed down the government with Obamacare.

I think the campaign exposed that Cruz really is an unlikable Jerk. The whole thing with his children not wanting to kiss him, the bacon on the gun,  trying to push Huckabee off stage with Kim Davis, lying about Ben Carson, 'vote your conscience' and then endorsing Trump.

Generally politicians who are ideological like Cruz need to be extremely likable. Reagan and Obama are the most obvious (but there's a host of lesser pols like Edwards/Rubio who use their backstory to justify more 'radical' policies). Cruz is the fatal combination of a social Conservative, a Tea-Bagger and a spineless, sleaze.

I think the 2016 campaign exposed this; but their traits that always existed.

The irony is that whilst he ran an awful Campaign, it's going to perfectly possible for Marco Rubio to run for President in 2024, and win. Even though Ted's 2016 campaign was great, he's still a sh**t product to sell

Nixon won a landslide in 1972 despite not being 'likable', and he won the nomination again after losing a presidential election the first time around.
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,509


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2018, 12:14:59 pm »

Presumably whoever would have won the nomination in the event that Trump hadn't run turned out to be the biggest loser.


In which case, it would particularly be most brutal for Jeb.
Logged
UncleSam
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,218
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: April 22, 2018, 03:02:06 pm »

No way. Ted Cruz remained a senator and didnít *completely* kill his future chances at the presidency. Sure his reputation took a hit but he also gained name recognition and a larger national network. Ted Cruz was a (very) marginal winner from the 2016 election.

The biggest loser was obviously Hillary Clinton. She went from presumed president and leader of the free world to an unpopular former Secretary of State with no political future whatsoever.

Jeb Bush would be the biggest loser on the Republican side, followed closely by John Kasich. Jeb went from presumed front runner and establishment pick to has-been skating on his family name with, again zero political future. John Kasich also lost most claim he had to a political future, but at least he was able to stay governor of Ohio for a few years and find a new political niche among anti-Trump Republicans and as a darling of the center-left media organizations - it is conceivable he could run a vanity campaign for president or he appointed to some position in a future administration of either party.

If you run for President as a senator or governor and donít win the nomination, itís a good outcome just to hold the status quo. Bernie arguably had the best possible outcome for a primary loser in that he gained massive name recognition and a national brand that he hadnít had previously. Outside of Bernie however, the future prospects of those who run for president and lose are typically quite poor.
Logged
Cath
Cathcon
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23,635
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: April 22, 2018, 04:09:06 pm »

I wouldn't put Cruz in the same league as Taft/Goldwater/Gore/Dole etc because all those people were popular within the Senate, and considered relative titans in their party. Most of the GOP in Washington hates Cruz, because Cruz uses his Senate Seat as a stick to bash the national GOP. He did it against Dewhurst in 2012 and then closed down the government with Obamacare.

I think the campaign exposed that Cruz really is an unlikable Jerk. The whole thing with his children not wanting to kiss him, the bacon on the gun,  trying to push Huckabee off stage with Kim Davis, lying about Ben Carson, 'vote your conscience' and then endorsing Trump.

Generally politicians who are ideological like Cruz need to be extremely likable. Reagan and Obama are the most obvious (but there's a host of lesser pols like Edwards/Rubio who use their backstory to justify more 'radical' policies). Cruz is the fatal combination of a social Conservative, a Tea-Bagger and a spineless, sleaze.

I think the 2016 campaign exposed this; but their traits that always existed.

The irony is that whilst he ran an awful Campaign, it's going to perfectly possible for Marco Rubio to run for President in 2024, and win. Even though Ted's 2016 campaign was great, he's still a sh**t product to sell

Nixon won a landslide in 1972 despite not being 'likable', and he won the nomination again after losing a presidential election the first time around.

The point is that, while he might not have been particularly ďlikableĒ, he wasnít particularly ideological either. By 1968, Nixon had practically mastered the art of being a political chimera.
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,509


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: April 22, 2018, 04:34:41 pm »

I wouldn't put Cruz in the same league as Taft/Goldwater/Gore/Dole etc because all those people were popular within the Senate, and considered relative titans in their party. Most of the GOP in Washington hates Cruz, because Cruz uses his Senate Seat as a stick to bash the national GOP. He did it against Dewhurst in 2012 and then closed down the government with Obamacare.

I think the campaign exposed that Cruz really is an unlikable Jerk. The whole thing with his children not wanting to kiss him, the bacon on the gun,  trying to push Huckabee off stage with Kim Davis, lying about Ben Carson, 'vote your conscience' and then endorsing Trump.

Generally politicians who are ideological like Cruz need to be extremely likable. Reagan and Obama are the most obvious (but there's a host of lesser pols like Edwards/Rubio who use their backstory to justify more 'radical' policies). Cruz is the fatal combination of a social Conservative, a Tea-Bagger and a spineless, sleaze.

I think the 2016 campaign exposed this; but their traits that always existed.

The irony is that whilst he ran an awful Campaign, it's going to perfectly possible for Marco Rubio to run for President in 2024, and win. Even though Ted's 2016 campaign was great, he's still a sh**t product to sell

Nixon won a landslide in 1972 despite not being 'likable', and he won the nomination again after losing a presidential election the first time around.

The point is that, while he might not have been particularly ďlikableĒ, he wasnít particularly ideological either. By 1968, Nixon had practically mastered the art of being a political chimera.

Cruz has been in the process of rebranding for a while now:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/meet-the-new-ted-cruz-214681

We'll see how that unfolds, but it's pretty clear that Cruz isn't doing the same thing again.
Logged
IDS Ex-Speaker Ben Kenobi
Ben Kenobi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,820
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: April 22, 2018, 05:22:02 pm »

I don't see how. Prior to New Hampshire in 2016, how many here would have said that Cruz would have won Wisconsin, and been a contender all the way until then?
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,509


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: April 22, 2018, 05:47:45 pm »

I don't see how. Prior to New Hampshire in 2016, how many here would have said that Cruz would have won Wisconsin, and been a contender all the way until then?

In Jan 2016 the consensus was that it would primarily be a Trump v. Cruz race. You're correct though in that if you turned back the clock months before that, no one was necessarily confident in the idea that Cruz would be a final contender. After Jeb and Walker declined following Trump's entry, people were making noise about Carson, Fiorina, etc. it was up in the air for everyone. Certainly, prior to Trump's entry though, not many people thought that Cruz was going to be a major force.
Logged
Justice Blair
Blair2015
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,091
United Kingdom


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2018, 04:08:06 am »

I wouldn't put Cruz in the same league as Taft/Goldwater/Gore/Dole etc because all those people were popular within the Senate, and considered relative titans in their party. Most of the GOP in Washington hates Cruz, because Cruz uses his Senate Seat as a stick to bash the national GOP. He did it against Dewhurst in 2012 and then closed down the government with Obamacare.

I think the campaign exposed that Cruz really is an unlikable Jerk. The whole thing with his children not wanting to kiss him, the bacon on the gun,  trying to push Huckabee off stage with Kim Davis, lying about Ben Carson, 'vote your conscience' and then endorsing Trump.

Generally politicians who are ideological like Cruz need to be extremely likable. Reagan and Obama are the most obvious (but there's a host of lesser pols like Edwards/Rubio who use their backstory to justify more 'radical' policies). Cruz is the fatal combination of a social Conservative, a Tea-Bagger and a spineless, sleaze.

I think the 2016 campaign exposed this; but their traits that always existed.

The irony is that whilst he ran an awful Campaign, it's going to perfectly possible for Marco Rubio to run for President in 2024, and win. Even though Ted's 2016 campaign was great, he's still a sh**t product to sell

Nixon won a landslide in 1972 despite not being 'likable', and he won the nomination again after losing a presidential election the first time around.

As Cath says, my point was about being unlikable, and ridiculously ideological. Ofc once you're President you can get away with being less likeable, as you've got the power of the Office, achievements to point to etc.

If Nixon had the views of say Jesse Helms, and ran in 1968, I don't think he would have got the nomination.

I don't see how. Prior to New Hampshire in 2016, how many here would have said that Cruz would have won Wisconsin, and been a contender all the way until then?


For a while I had Cruz as the likely nominee. He was the only evangelical who was going to make it out of Iowa in any shape, and had a serious ground game in the South which would have allowed him to continue. The GOP primary in 2016 would have been very interesting if Trump hadn't came along and scrambled the system. 
Logged
Krago
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 758
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2018, 10:41:46 pm »

The GOP primary in 2016 would have been was very interesting if because Trump hadn't came along and scrambled the system. 

Fixed.
Logged
Sherrod Brown Shill
NerdFighter40351
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 634
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -6.43

P P
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: April 25, 2018, 10:06:40 am »

I gained a lot of respect for Cruz after the RNC, but then that (hilarious) picture of Cruz phone banking for Trump came out and it was clear that he had no conscience.
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,138
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: April 25, 2018, 10:37:52 am »

Cruz is dishonest, unlikeable, and his policies aren't popular with the broader electorate.
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,509


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: April 27, 2018, 03:22:13 pm »

I wouldn't put Cruz in the same league as Taft/Goldwater/Gore/Dole etc because all those people were popular within the Senate, and considered relative titans in their party. Most of the GOP in Washington hates Cruz, because Cruz uses his Senate Seat as a stick to bash the national GOP. He did it against Dewhurst in 2012 and then closed down the government with Obamacare.

I think the campaign exposed that Cruz really is an unlikable Jerk. The whole thing with his children not wanting to kiss him, the bacon on the gun,  trying to push Huckabee off stage with Kim Davis, lying about Ben Carson, 'vote your conscience' and then endorsing Trump.

Generally politicians who are ideological like Cruz need to be extremely likable. Reagan and Obama are the most obvious (but there's a host of lesser pols like Edwards/Rubio who use their backstory to justify more 'radical' policies). Cruz is the fatal combination of a social Conservative, a Tea-Bagger and a spineless, sleaze.

I think the 2016 campaign exposed this; but their traits that always existed.

The irony is that whilst he ran an awful Campaign, it's going to perfectly possible for Marco Rubio to run for President in 2024, and win. Even though Ted's 2016 campaign was great, he's still a sh**t product to sell

Nixon won a landslide in 1972 despite not being 'likable', and he won the nomination again after losing a presidential election the first time around.

As Cath says, my point was about being unlikable, and ridiculously ideological. Ofc once you're President you can get away with being less likeable, as you've got the power of the Office, achievements to point to etc.

If Nixon had the views of say Jesse Helms, and ran in 1968, I don't think he would have got the nomination.

I don't see how. Prior to New Hampshire in 2016, how many here would have said that Cruz would have won Wisconsin, and been a contender all the way until then?


For a while I had Cruz as the likely nominee. He was the only evangelical who was going to make it out of Iowa in any shape, and had a serious ground game in the South which would have allowed him to continue. The GOP primary in 2016 would have been very interesting if Trump hadn't came along and scrambled the system.  

Sue, but on a relative scale, you say Rubio say has done better relative to Cruz, but it should be mentioned that Rubio is pretty ideological himself and has also taken a big hit in approval.

https://poll.qu.edu/florida/release-detail?ReleaseID=2523
Logged
Neoliberalbusters
Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,719
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.00, S: -4.00

P P
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: April 28, 2018, 08:14:54 am »

Cruz is dishonest, unlikeable, and his policies aren't popular with the broader electorate.
Logged
Young Conservative
youngconservative
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,453
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: April 28, 2018, 11:39:20 pm »

HE tried to please everyone in regards to Trump and it backfired. The same thing happened to Rubio with....every position ever. The rising GOP stars are the consistent.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines