|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on May 18, 2023 3:54:51 GMT -5
Even without the emergence of Trump, I don't know if Cruz would have won the nomination. He definitely wouldn't have beaten HRC. That’s really too bad because Ted Cruz is extremely smart. And Hillary Clinton was a practiced corrupt liar. But I guess the American public really is that fickle. |
|
|
|
Post by 🌽🍞 on May 18, 2023 5:04:32 GMT -5
Funeral is big mad lately. Crazy posts at all of hours of the day and night. So funny to watch his little mind say the same 5 things expecting to wow everyone with his “intellect”
|
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on May 18, 2023 6:57:22 GMT -5
Even without the emergence of Trump, I don't know if Cruz would have won the nomination. He definitely wouldn't have beaten HRC. That’s really too bad because Ted Cruz is extremely smart. And Hillary Clinton was a practiced corrupt liar. But I guess the American public really is that fickle. Cruz, to me, has come across as competent sometimes but never "presidential". |
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on May 18, 2023 7:12:09 GMT -5
That’s really too bad because Ted Cruz is extremely smart. And Hillary Clinton was a practiced corrupt liar. But I guess the American public really is that fickle. Cruz, to me, has come across as competent sometimes but never "presidential". well? Joe Biden obviously presented himself as presidential when he is also incompetent And his family is obviously compromised. So what does “presidential,” really mean? Bobby Kennedy Junior actually has some great thoughts and ideas but the democratic party has moved way beyond the Kennedys at this point. He’s not “presidential.” |
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on May 18, 2023 7:13:52 GMT -5
Funeral is big mad lately. Crazy posts at all of hours of the day and night. So funny to watch his little mind say the same 5 things expecting to wow everyone with his “intellect” I can’t help but wonder who cornbread really is? He sounds remarkably familiar like a moderator I once knew.It is the same pattern of speech and writing. Sad. |
|
|
|
Post by 🌽🍞 on May 18, 2023 7:17:13 GMT -5
You are sad that is correct. How many accounts have you made just to talk to yourself on here? You keep coming back when you get pooped on all day. Come on Funeral get better
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,255 
|
Post by bluepenquin on May 18, 2023 7:28:20 GMT -5
That’s really too bad because Ted Cruz is extremely smart. And Hillary Clinton was a practiced corrupt liar. But I guess the American public really is that fickle. Cruz, to me, has come across as competent sometimes but never "presidential". Which is better than incompetent and never presidential (which would be Trump). |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,255
|
Post by bluepenquin on May 18, 2023 7:35:45 GMT -5
In 2016 - Ted Cruz probably best fit the movement (and would have most certainly been the nominee had it not been for Trump) Ted Cruz is one of the most unlikable people in America, and I'm pretty sure he will never be President of the USA. There is a good chance he will not be Senator after the 2024 election. Sean Trende has been calling his upcoming senate race as a tossup. Cruz being unlikable in Washington - was part of him being 'MAGA'. He didn't necessarily support the existing establishment Republicans (Bush, McConnell, etc...) and was sort of in that MAGA grassroot movement. He was also very much in the Evangelical wing - which isn't/wasn't MAGA. But this has now become more blurred. As a side note - Evangelical's supported Mitt Romney every bit as much as their support for Bush. It was another group of people that were really moving the party into a different direction. |
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on May 18, 2023 8:00:08 GMT -5
Cruz, to me, has come across as competent sometimes but never "presidential". Which is better than incompetent and never presidential (which would be Trump). This reminds me of the John Cook discussions on the volleyball side. John has a habit of sticking his foot in his mouth. Is he one of the best if not the best coach in the NCAA’s? Yes he is. John is not very presidential. Do you want someone good at their job or that can smooge like a used car salesman? |
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on May 18, 2023 8:01:44 GMT -5
Evangelicals as a group comprise a shrinking percentage of the American population (though not necessarily a shrinking percentage of GOP voters). The Dobbs decision also took their predominant mobilizing issue off the table, probably forever. Between those two things, I'm skeptical Evangelicals are going to represent the same political force going forward as they have the last 40ish years. Maybe they can be mobilized over trans panic or a general rollback of gay rights but my impression is that's less compelling than abortion.
|
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on May 18, 2023 8:02:39 GMT -5
Which is better than incompetent and never presidential (which would be Trump). This reminds me of the John Cook discussions on the volleyball side. John has a habit of sticking his foot in his mouth. Is he one of the best if not the best coach in the NCAA’s? Yes he is. John is not very presidential. Do you want someone good at their job or that can smooge like a used car salesman? He's definitely top 10. |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on May 18, 2023 9:22:44 GMT -5
Cruz, to me, has come across as competent sometimes but never "presidential". Which is better than incompetent and never presidential (which would be Trump). I guess part of that depends on what criteria we associate with being “presidential”. |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,255
|
Post by bluepenquin on May 18, 2023 13:13:05 GMT -5
Evangelicals as a group comprise a shrinking percentage of the American population (though not necessarily a shrinking percentage of GOP voters). The Dobbs decision also took their predominant mobilizing issue off the table, probably forever. Between those two things, I'm skeptical Evangelicals are going to represent the same political force going forward as they have the last 40ish years. Maybe they can be mobilized over trans panic or a general rollback of gay rights but my impression is that's less compelling than abortion. What general rollback of gay rights would evangelicals be interested in? Other than forcing people (and particularly pastors) to provide services to things they find objectionable - I don't know what the dividing line would be right now? Certainly any kind of 'going back' isn't on the table. As for the trans 'panic' - the set of people in this group is probably 5X the size of evangelicals. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on May 18, 2023 13:17:19 GMT -5
What general rollback of gay rights would evangelicals be interested in? Other than forcing people (and particularly pastors) to provide services to things they find objectionable - I don't know what the dividing line would be right now? Certainly any kind of 'going back' isn't on the table. This is like your claim that no one wants to block access to birth control. It's simply not factual. It's what you claim because you don't want to have to defend the indefensible, but there are *plenty* of people who want to roll back gay rights. And many of those people are Evangelicals. (Also conservatives from other religions, like Islam and Judaism.) |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,255
|
Post by bluepenquin on May 18, 2023 13:32:15 GMT -5
What general rollback of gay rights would evangelicals be interested in? Other than forcing people (and particularly pastors) to provide services to things they find objectionable - I don't know what the dividing line would be right now? Certainly any kind of 'going back' isn't on the table. This is like your claim that no one wants to block access to birth control. It's simply not factual. It's what you claim because you don't want to have to defend the indefensible, but there are *plenty* of people who want to roll back gay rights. And many of those people are Evangelicals. (Also conservatives from other religions, like Islam and Judaism.) I am sure there are some that want to do this. It isn't a big number/percentage of evangelicals and certainy not enough to do anything. I would guess that evangelical support for birth control is closer to 95% than it is to 50%. I have yet to meet a person that wants to ban birth control. Now, if you are taking about parental consent for minors - that is entirely different. |
|
