I don't conceded that anything Trump said or did was reckless or irresponsible. Anyone trying to package it that way for the normies is a surrender monkey who IS ACCEPTING THE LEFT'S PREMISE.
No way, no how, should Cruz or any Republican concede that Trump was reckless or irresponsible when talking about the FACT that they STOPPED COUNTING VOTES WHEN THINGS WERE NOT GOING THEIR WAY.
They literally STOLE an election are trying to pretend the guy who didn't "quietly accept" that is the bad one in the scenario.
But you're correct, GP is a click bait asshole who often quotes things out of context.
Cruz is mostly critiquing the the rhetoric (style), or at least that's my take listening to the audio.
I agree that Trump won in a landslide, I've seen the evidence myself which is clear as day, and doesn't require relying on any of the more fantastical or unproven claims. Literally election night I was founding a few hundred-thousand Biden only votes in states, where president-only votes don't happen historically.
I don't think telling the truth is irresponsible. So I do dissagree with Cruz on that point. But it's not the level of critique or Trump bashing that the article makes it out to be.
That's just two competing styles but the saying goes. The squeaky wheel is the one who gets the oil. You either be loud and complain or you get forced to submit. Trump fights while Cruz tries to find a more even handed approach.
So basically he's being a cowardly, feckless lawyer afraid to call a spade a spade.
Trump didn't perform the ceremony in a court of law to get his statements declared "proven" so it's irresponsible of him to say those things! Nevermind that a) Trump isn't a lawyer and b) the entire judicial system is known at this point to be riddled with corruption.
This is why I loath lawyers. Judicial zealotry is a luxury we can only afford when the country is free of corruption. I for one won't be voting for this fightless, booger-eating turd in the primary. I'd rather elect a ham sandwich over Cruz.
He's not saying Trump himself is irresponsible. He made a short comment about how specific statements were irresponsible. in particular claiming he had won in a landslide. Based on my view of the evidence, Trump did win in a landslide. And that's based on EVIDENCE, and not vague kracken, or q-anon style stuff that's vague with weak support.
So I dissagree with Cruz's statement, but he's not really bashing Trump that harshly.
For example, I could say the manner in which Cruz worded his critique in those few seconds was irresponsible, but it's not really the same as me accusing Cruz of being irresponsible in general. Cruz is 90% to 95% on our side, which I'll take over nearly everyone else in DC.
Thanks. This is known as quote mining, what the article did. I agree 100% with your assessment. I could apologize for Cruz further, saying he's merely re-stating what Trump said, fine tuning it for his audience.
We'll really know when we see how Cruz votes on impeachment. I think it should be tossed, just like the last one.
I took Cruz's comments on rhetoric did criticize Trump, but the overall interview is Pro-Trump. And the GP click bait pissed off a lot of people I know!
I agree. I don't want Cruz or any other conservative giving an inch. The strongest possible language should be used at every opportunity. Any less than that is illustrating complicity in the fraud. We played by the rules while they overtly stole the damn thing. THEY should be walking on pins and needles, not us.
Personally, I don't trust Cruz. It's clear he's one of the rehearsed politicians that jumped over all the proper establishment hurdles to become a DC insider. We need homegrown politicians that proved their conservative, anti-globalist chops BEFORE entering office. And preferably, no more Ivy League assholes. I'll take a guy with a degree from a community college over one from Harvard at this point. Any day of the week.
Personally, I don't trust Cruz. It's clear he's one of the rehearsed politicians that jumped over all the proper establishment hurdles to become a DC insider.
Yup. Trump said he won big, cause he had to. If he had been quiet like Cruz is saying, no one would know otherwise. He had to speak out, as he was the only one doing it. Trump also knew court of public opinion, especially when it comes to something the media and now courts wont hear or talk about, is especially important when you are trying to be silenced.
Cruz isn't stupid, he knows this. He's saying just enough to be "critical" of Trump, but not enough to throw off any stupid plebs into not voting him back in office, which they will. He waited until dozens of courts threw cases out the window on 'technicalities' before he started saying anything about needing investigations. We had investigations, we got the evidence, we don't need more investigations, we need courts and trials now. But of course, he isn't pushing for that. Just like before the 6th, and 2 hours after the "siege", in those 2 hours he completely forgot about the 10 day investigation he was pushing.
Like everything else he's done over the past 4 years, he's talk. He's all talk, he never actually does anything. 90% MAGA is still a 10% RINO. And a RINO is a RINO.
Cruz makes a short comment, suggesting the rhetoric (style) around winning in a landslide was irresponsible. However, it's not quite the level of bashing trump that the article and title suggests. His tone of voice is mostly "trump did X, y, z which wasn't ideal, but..."
But that's only a few seconds of critique, when he spends 15+ minutes laying out the case that there was fraud, and that we need an investigation and day in court, and that we never got that.
So for example, I might say Cruz's wording in that particular comment was irresponsible, but that critique is only about Cruz's specific comments those few seconds, and not about Cruz in general or what he says during the wider 15 minutes.
I watched about 15 minutes of the clip, and Cruz spends 95% of it arguing on our behalf, and the other 5% saying things that mildly annoy me. I don't agree with Trump all the time either, so unless we're expecting puritans, the podcast taken in it's entirety is something we should be very happy about ... that Cruz is still fighting for us.
Instead, MAGA was tricked into bashing one of our few allies for a few comments that were out of place.
I don't conceded that anything Trump said or did was reckless or irresponsible. Anyone trying to package it that way for the normies is a surrender monkey who IS ACCEPTING THE LEFT'S PREMISE.
No way, no how, should Cruz or any Republican concede that Trump was reckless or irresponsible when talking about the FACT that they STOPPED COUNTING VOTES WHEN THINGS WERE NOT GOING THEIR WAY.
They literally STOLE an election are trying to pretend the guy who didn't "quietly accept" that is the bad one in the scenario.
But you're correct, GP is a click bait asshole who often quotes things out of context.
Cruz is mostly critiquing the the rhetoric (style), or at least that's my take listening to the audio.
I agree that Trump won in a landslide, I've seen the evidence myself which is clear as day, and doesn't require relying on any of the more fantastical or unproven claims. Literally election night I was founding a few hundred-thousand Biden only votes in states, where president-only votes don't happen historically.
I don't think telling the truth is irresponsible. So I do dissagree with Cruz on that point. But it's not the level of critique or Trump bashing that the article makes it out to be.
Did Cruz actually label DJT as irresponsible?
He said it was irresponsible to claim that he won big before proving it in the courts first, that’s pretty much it.
That's just two competing styles but the saying goes. The squeaky wheel is the one who gets the oil. You either be loud and complain or you get forced to submit. Trump fights while Cruz tries to find a more even handed approach.
So basically he's being a cowardly, feckless lawyer afraid to call a spade a spade.
Trump didn't perform the ceremony in a court of law to get his statements declared "proven" so it's irresponsible of him to say those things! Nevermind that a) Trump isn't a lawyer and b) the entire judicial system is known at this point to be riddled with corruption.
This is why I loath lawyers. Judicial zealotry is a luxury we can only afford when the country is free of corruption. I for one won't be voting for this fightless, booger-eating turd in the primary. I'd rather elect a ham sandwich over Cruz.
Thanks. That's way different than saying Trump's claims or speech promoted violence.
We'd all like for election fraud and DJT victory to have been proven in the Courts. Never got the chance. Laches don't you know ...
Also, by presenting a case in Court, you're making a "claim." So Cruz sux balls here, but is still defending Trump as far as I can see.
He's not saying Trump himself is irresponsible. He made a short comment about how specific statements were irresponsible. in particular claiming he had won in a landslide. Based on my view of the evidence, Trump did win in a landslide. And that's based on EVIDENCE, and not vague kracken, or q-anon style stuff that's vague with weak support.
So I dissagree with Cruz's statement, but he's not really bashing Trump that harshly.
For example, I could say the manner in which Cruz worded his critique in those few seconds was irresponsible, but it's not really the same as me accusing Cruz of being irresponsible in general. Cruz is 90% to 95% on our side, which I'll take over nearly everyone else in DC.
Thanks. This is known as quote mining, what the article did. I agree 100% with your assessment. I could apologize for Cruz further, saying he's merely re-stating what Trump said, fine tuning it for his audience.
We'll really know when we see how Cruz votes on impeachment. I think it should be tossed, just like the last one.
I took Cruz's comments on rhetoric did criticize Trump, but the overall interview is Pro-Trump. And the GP click bait pissed off a lot of people I know!
I agree. I don't want Cruz or any other conservative giving an inch. The strongest possible language should be used at every opportunity. Any less than that is illustrating complicity in the fraud. We played by the rules while they overtly stole the damn thing. THEY should be walking on pins and needles, not us.
Personally, I don't trust Cruz. It's clear he's one of the rehearsed politicians that jumped over all the proper establishment hurdles to become a DC insider. We need homegrown politicians that proved their conservative, anti-globalist chops BEFORE entering office. And preferably, no more Ivy League assholes. I'll take a guy with a degree from a community college over one from Harvard at this point. Any day of the week.
Yup. Trump said he won big, cause he had to. If he had been quiet like Cruz is saying, no one would know otherwise. He had to speak out, as he was the only one doing it. Trump also knew court of public opinion, especially when it comes to something the media and now courts wont hear or talk about, is especially important when you are trying to be silenced.
Cruz isn't stupid, he knows this. He's saying just enough to be "critical" of Trump, but not enough to throw off any stupid plebs into not voting him back in office, which they will. He waited until dozens of courts threw cases out the window on 'technicalities' before he started saying anything about needing investigations. We had investigations, we got the evidence, we don't need more investigations, we need courts and trials now. But of course, he isn't pushing for that. Just like before the 6th, and 2 hours after the "siege", in those 2 hours he completely forgot about the 10 day investigation he was pushing.
Like everything else he's done over the past 4 years, he's talk. He's all talk, he never actually does anything. 90% MAGA is still a 10% RINO. And a RINO is a RINO.
u/fuckrioters is asserting that Cruz didn't concede DJT did anything reckless or irresponsible. Do you disagree with his assessment?
Cruz makes a short comment, suggesting the rhetoric (style) around winning in a landslide was irresponsible. However, it's not quite the level of bashing trump that the article and title suggests. His tone of voice is mostly "trump did X, y, z which wasn't ideal, but..."
But that's only a few seconds of critique, when he spends 15+ minutes laying out the case that there was fraud, and that we need an investigation and day in court, and that we never got that.
So for example, I might say Cruz's wording in that particular comment was irresponsible, but that critique is only about Cruz's specific comments those few seconds, and not about Cruz in general or what he says during the wider 15 minutes.
I watched about 15 minutes of the clip, and Cruz spends 95% of it arguing on our behalf, and the other 5% saying things that mildly annoy me. I don't agree with Trump all the time either, so unless we're expecting puritans, the podcast taken in it's entirety is something we should be very happy about ... that Cruz is still fighting for us.
Instead, MAGA was tricked into bashing one of our few allies for a few comments that were out of place.