Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    It’s On! Trump Twitter Tirade Against Cruz

    It’s On! Trump Twitter Tirade Against Cruz

    Have we entered the two-man phase of the primaries?

    Following the GOP debate, Professor Jacobson noted that it looks like a two person race between Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, and not only is this view becoming a consensus but apparently Trump thinks so, too.

    Trump has taken to Twitter to rant and rave against Cruz.

    His Twitter feed is chock-full of tweets just like these, and it’s quite clear that he is really (really) worried about Cruz.  As Trump said during the debate, he’s attacking Cruz now only because Cruz is polling so well.

    Obviously, it doesn’t end with loans and donations, he’s also ranting about New York City and Cruz’s point about Trump’s New York values, a point people outside of NYC understand very well.

    The “wiseguy apology” to which Trump refers:

    Solid gold.

    And my personal favorite . . .

    For his part, Cruz is not being drawn into a Twitter feud with Trump, and in addition to the above tweet, has posted one other (excluding retweets) today on Trump:

    Trump seems thin-skinned and a bit petty today on Twitter, and it seems that Cruz has rocked him more than should be evident.

    Battle lines are being drawn and prominent pundits are picking sides.

    Here’s Mark Levin’s advice to Trump:

    Either cut the crap – your accusations this morning that Cruz is Canadian, a criminal, owned by big banks, etc. (see link below) – or you will lose lots and lots of conservatives. Save the liberal New York City bully tactics for the New York City liberals. Put down your computer keyboard for a few hours, think before you tweet, and collect yourself. You’re not politically invincible, regardless of the polls and media.

    I am already hearing more and more people getting fed up with the low road you’re taking against Cruz, which has obviously intensified this morning. You don’t need to attack his honor or attempt to smear his reputation. You can leave that to Mitch McConnell and the New York Times. Engage on real and substantive issues that matter to the country. Like I said, my friendly advice.

    Levin cuts to the heart of the problem of Trump’s current tactics against Cruz.  The people who avidly support Trump will continue to do so no matter what he says or does (we’ve seen that time and again), but the people who are wavering between Trump and Cruz are unlikely to be swayed by Trump’s rants.

    Cruz made a similar observation today.

    “It seems Donald has a lot of nervous energy,” he told reporters earlier Saturday in Fort Mill, S.C. “It seems for whatever reason Donald doesn’t react well when he’s going down in the polls. I imagine he’s very dismayed by the latest Wall Street Journal-NBC poll that shows in a head-to-head…he’d lose to me. Knowing Donald, that’s got to drive him nuts.”

    . . . . “In terms of a commander-in-chief, we ought to have someone who isn’t springing out of bed to tweet in frantic response to the latest polls,” Cruz said.

    The Texas senator, who has dismissed Trump’s conservative credibility by accusing him of having “New York values,” unpacked that line in more depth, noting that Trump himself used the phrase in a 1999 interview in which he also described himself as supporting abortion rights and not ruling out partial birth abortion, among other more liberal positions.

    “Donald’s explanation, not mine, is because he’s a New Yorker, he’s from New York,” Cruz said.

    Trump attacking Cruz the way he attacked others may backfire:

    [Featured image via Twitter . . . in happier times]


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    The fetish to make it a two man race, to decide the issue before ANY votes are cast, is what is painfully wrong in the whole of politics these days.

    Let the voters decide, not the pundits and bloggers who are pushing an agenda.

    tom swift | January 16, 2016 at 10:33 pm

    It’s been a two-man race for a long time. Some have had some trouble seeing that, wasting attention on sideshows like Jeb and Rubio, or circus sideshows like Fiorina.

    Trump seems thin-skinned and a bit petty today on Twitter

    Kid stuff.

    If he gave a little speech to a bunch of third graders, he’d be wise to keep it simple. Leave the big words and the big concepts out. No adult hearing the speech would be dumb enough to conclude that it meant that Trump doesn’t know any big words or that he can’t grasp big concepts.

    Yet that’s what they assume when they read silly Tweets. They make the bizarre assumption that Twitter is important, and is being treated as such by the candidate.

    Twitter is for twits, and some (like, apparently, Trump) treat it that way.

    Does that mean it’s unimportant? Hardly, when one of America’s founding political principles is (or has morphed to become) that twits have the same vote as non-twits. So I expect the candidates to continue fighting it out in the twitterverse. Certainly, it’s cheap enough, and any junior staffer can do it, so it’s no burden on the campaign; and if it rounds up a few votes, then the cost/benefit ratio is very favorable.

    But I rather doubt that following the Twitter food-fights will lead to any insight into how the campaigns are actually proceeding.

    damocles | January 17, 2016 at 12:43 am

    If you are interested I thought this was an interesting article District of Columbia vs.Heller (2008). It was how the ruling by the current Supreme Court on the word “militia” in regards to the Second Amendment, supports the Cruz is a natural born citizen position.

    Perhaps Professor Jacobson might way in.

      That article is not persuasive because it comppletely omits the effects of thec1795 Act where congress changed thectype of citizenship conferred on foreign born children of a citizen to naturalized citizenship.

        damocles in reply to Gary Britt. | January 17, 2016 at 1:56 am

        The point of the article is to say that the original Founders did indeed make accommodation for children born abroad. Of course even though the 1795 act can also be used to help interpret, it is further away from the time the Constitution was ratified and, the 1795 Act itself,was superseded, repealed and replaced by subsequent law. Bringing us to current law once more and Cruz is still eligible. The point being the original law in the Constitution was the closest we have to the thought of the Founders. The 1795 Act could play a role, but then so could the very many naturalization acts that have come and gone in between. The two that seem most relevant are the one that is closest to the Constitution at the time of its ratification and the law when Cruz was born. But I’m sure both sides would bring up many more arguments, I just thought this one was interesting.
        Also, it would be somewhat difficult for the Supreme Court to go against their own ruling on the language as decided in “Heller”. if only to save face. Furthermore, setting a precedent that would cast doubt on other past and possible future Presidential nominees might not be something that any of the Justices want to be involved in.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | January 17, 2016 at 6:06 am

        Gari, nobody believes you. You’re a liar for T-rump, and you have no credibility any more. Like your “man”, you’ve done it to yourself.

    Ragspierre | January 17, 2016 at 9:12 am

    Speaking to a crowd at a Portsmouth, N.H., rally hosted by Scott Brown on Saturday, Donald Trump said the former senator would make a “very good” vice president.

    After Trump asked Brown whether he would consider running for public office again, a member of the audience floated the idea of a Trump-Brown ticket in 2016.

    “Vice president – hey, that sounds like it could, hey, hey, very good,” Trump responded.

    “Hey, you know what? And he’s central casting. Look at that guy. Central casting,” he added. “He’s great. Great guy and a great, beautiful, great wife and family. So important.”
    —the politically “brilliant” T-rump

    That, and the endorsement of Progressive populist Mike Hucksterbeeeee should give him a lock on the nomination.

    (I kid.)

    Ragspierre | January 17, 2016 at 10:08 am

    That was just ugly. Hilarious, but ugly…!!!

    Conservatives are seeing who Duh Donald IS, and we don’t like him.

      And two minutes later that same crowd gave him a standing ovation. Yes a smattering of boos from a handful of Cruz supporters when Trump rightly pointed out how Cruz did his best slick willy Clinton/lawyer immitation by hiding these loans and then when caught lying claiming it was just a paperwork error. But two minutes later a standing ovation for Trump.

      What I noted on the video mostly was how ridiculously small in number were the attendees at this conference. It was for Cruz a large crowd but Trump usually has to turn away ten times that number of people from his yuuuge many thousands sized crowds. I’ve never seen him speak at such a tiny gathering.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend