Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    High on Alabama Win, Democrats Target Ted Cruz’s Seat

    High on Alabama Win, Democrats Target Ted Cruz’s Seat

    Good luck with that

    Democrat Dog Jones pulled off an upset in Alabama’s special Senate election, barely beating embattled Republican Roy Moore.

    High on the Alabama win, Democrats are experiencing delusions of grandeur, believing bamamentum will carry over to the Lone Star State.

    And even a former Senior Bernie Sanders aide:

    The narrative is building for one specific reason — if Democrats want to prevent the GOP from retaining the power of fillibuster heading into 2019, they have to defeat Ted Cruz. Texas is their only chance.

    Politico mused:

    If Democrats can legitimately put Texas in play — still an if — it would be an important moment for the party going into the next election. Raising money for 2018 would be a lot easier if they can inspire donors with a message of potentially taking the Senate, as opposed to just stanching the bleeding.

    Still, senior Democrats are quick to tamp down expectations about their chances in the Lone Star State. Last year, Democrats had a favorable map and were bubbling with confidence about their prospects of winning the Senate — only to experience a disaster on Election Day.

    Their focus is on reelecting endangered incumbents and keeping the GOP from a filibuster-proof majority in 2019, which would allow Republicans to run roughshod over Democrats.

    As did Business Insider. Drunk on the kool aid, The Week even suggested, “Victory is a real possibility,” when writing about a potential Cruz upset.

    Everyone on the “Cruz is vulnerable” train points to Cruz’s low favorability ratings at home as a harbinger of things to come, boast that even the scandal-laden Moore was better liked by his would-be constituents, and note that assumed Democrat primary opponent Beto O’Rourke is just the man to bring Cruz down. But Ted Cruz is no Roy Moore and Texas is a completely different beast than Alabama.

    Cruz’s refusal to endorse Trump at the Republican National Convention, his Senate grandstanding, and his run for the presidency so soon after ascending to the Senate upset many a diehard supporter back home. But given a choice between a Democrat or Cruz, the choice is easy for Texans.

    No election is a lock and life loves to throw curve balls in the midst of surety, but trying to knock off Cruz without a major scandalous strike is a fool’s game.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | December 14, 2017 at 8:01 pm

    The Dems “taking” the election from Roy Moore was their first mistake in the 2018 and 2020 elections.

    The Dems have peaked too soon……

    Ragspierre | December 14, 2017 at 8:05 pm

    Cruz is a polished speaker who can resonate with his conservative audience AND good-faith independents. Moore was never any part of that.

    Cruz is an unquestioned Constitutional scholar, respected by both sides of constitutional issues. Moore is a clown.

    Cruz has led a life in public service, not unlike Moore. What IS different is that Cruz was never removed from office, and has no history of acting like a nut.

    For the sake of the idiots here, I never believed “the women” when T-rump (that lying sack of shit or his bath bois here) was smearing Cruz. There are quite a few reasons for this, but it doesn’t matter. Because…idiots.

    Bear in mind that that kind of sexual allegation (which was survived) is supposed to be unanswerable, deadly, and easy.

    Cruz will cruise to a re-election. Cruz is a LOT of what Moore could NEVER be.

    And idiots abound here now. They flourish. This is a shame.

      Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | December 14, 2017 at 10:45 pm

      “…I never believed “the women” when T-rump (that lying sack of shit or his bath bois here) was smearing Cruz.”

      Another of your considerable number of lies. Trump didn’t trot out any women to smear Cruz.

      MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | December 14, 2017 at 10:52 pm

      Morris, do you really believe that the 30 K of illegals voting are really going to care how polished Cruz speaks?! When God was handing out brains, you thought he said trains and said “I missed mine.”

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 14, 2017 at 11:04 pm

      I make few predictions.

      I predicted Moore was toast.

      Some idiots were predicting he would win handily.

      I stand by my Cruz prediction. Idiots notwithstanding.

    Any politician. especially Republican politicians, running in 2018 can be brought down. Why? Because, anybody can bring forth unsupported allegations of sexually inappropriate behavior to smear them with. And Ted Cruz in not impervious to that. He stands a better chance of surviving than Moore, as he is a member of the GOPe and it is unlikely that the party would abandon him. But, he better develop a very thick skin. Of course, there is always the possibility that he will be primaried out by an anti-establishment candidate, as Luther Strange found out.

      Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | December 14, 2017 at 9:47 pm

      Another nutter comment by a nutter.

      I expect a T-rump freak-a-zoid to primary Cruz. You’ll LOOOOOVE it.

      It will be crushed.

      I will laugh.

        Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | December 14, 2017 at 10:48 pm

        While I am not on the anti – Cruz bandwagon and hope he remains, do not forget he could not break 50% in the Texas primary. Not everyone in Texas holds him in such a high opinion.

        He is susceptible to the same political folly as any other candidate.

        Mac45 in reply to Ragspierre. | December 14, 2017 at 11:35 pm

        I realize that you are an ardent Cruzbot. But, there is NO guarantee that Cruz will not be primaried out by an anti-establishment candidate. Remember, Cruz attempted to position himself as an anti-establishment candidate from the first day in the Senate. However, he is closely allied with the Bush clan, Goldman Sacks and the financial establishment and in no way stopped, or even slowed the progressive juggernaut in Congress. And sufficient voter knew that to pick Trump over him.

        Now, I have no desire to see Cruz out of office. He is not bad, as members of the establishment go. But, he is vulnerable to both the Dems and to anti-establishment voters. He probably will not be primaried out. And, he will probably defeat a Dem challenger in the general, as the GOPe will not abandon him as it did Moore. Cruz would further the republican installation of jurists. But, Cruz will never support the Trump agenda, unless his Establishment masters wish it. And, the anti-establishment voters all know that. Just as they knew the same about Strange. We’ll have to see what kind of a campaign Cruz decides to run.

          Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | December 15, 2017 at 3:07 am

          What a nutter.

          How many Goldman-Sachs REAL alumni has T-rump, the ultimate INSIDER, surrounded himself with?

          Poor, stupid thang…

            Obie1 in reply to Ragspierre. | December 15, 2017 at 6:39 am

            Why the obsession with GS? Yeah, I get that most people don’t understand investment banking, but that doesn’t make it an illegitimate business. What, they engage in capitalism? The horror. What they employ 35k people? Fire them all, lousy fat cats. Would you prefer he selected life-long politicians?

            Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 15, 2017 at 9:26 am

            Actually, I have very little against Goldman-Sachs, though we all know some of their conduct stinks.

            Mostly, I just stick it back in the faces of T-rump cultists who slime Cruz with GS, and screech that his associations make him unfit or some such stupid nonsense.

            See the nutter Mac45 for an example.

            Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | December 15, 2017 at 11:37 am

            “Mostly, I just stick…”

            In other words, you practice dishonesty because you believe others are unfair…

            Mac45 in reply to Ragspierre. | December 15, 2017 at 12:02 pm


            Goldman Sacks is in the heart of the financial Establishment that Cruz was supposedly running against in 2016. Yet he had, and still does have, very close ties to GS due to his wife’s long time employment there. In other words, the Cruz family income relies directly, to a hefty degree, upon the interests of one of the financial giants that Cruz was supposedly running against.

            This is what frost’s Rags cookies. Cruz, a brilliant politician, recognized the growing frustration of the electorate and fully intended to cash in on that frustration by casting himself as an anti-establishment Senate maverick. It probably would have worked, too. Except for the entry of DLT. But, Cruz, the man/politician, does not look anything like Cruz, the candidate in 2016. Much, if not most, of his career has been closely tied to the Bush family. Staunch members of the Establishment. His wife is a long time employee of Goldman Sachs, a staunch member of the financial Establishment. His brief foray into private practice saw him working almost exclusively for the interests of large corporations against the little guy. Not exactly the portrait of the anti-Establishment outsider that he chose to exhibit during the 2016 elections. Rags response to these points is always the same. The person making them is either a liar or crazy and should not be listened to and that Trump has close ties to the Establishment as well. The former is simply stupid and the latter is true, but discounts the fact that Trump is keeping his promises, to the extent that DC allows him to. And Cruz, though he made loud noises about fighting the Establishment in the Senate, had no affect on any legislation which the Establishment wanted passed.

            Trump also has close ties to the financial Establishment, through his development businesses. However, he never really ran against the financial establishment, except in the sense that MAGA would cut into the profitability of their overseas investments. He ran on creating US economic dominance and removing Establishment interests who were an impediment to that goal.

            Will Goldman Sachs make money on a revitalized US economy? It sure will, eventually. It will simply shift its investments to domestic concerns and away from international ones. Will it, and the rest of the financial Establishment, be happy about the change? Not really. It means that a lot of time, effort and money has been wasted on international investments, some of which will be lost. And, that means that GS, as well as the rest of the major investment banking community in initially invested in maintaining the status quo. There is absolutely nothing wrong with GS, or any other legitimate business making money.

            MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | December 15, 2017 at 2:45 pm

            Ballotpedia 2012

            Republican Ted Cruz 56.5% 4,440,137
            Democratic Paul Sadler 40.6% 3,194,927

            900k difference. Pretty big to overcome, but making a big deal about it will get money flowing to the Dems.

            This is an off year election and I would recommend that nobody sit back and not go vote.

            Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 15, 2017 at 10:33 pm

            Mac45…like his man-crush…is an economics moron.

            He’s also a proponent of tyranny.

            There’s only ONE way any “financial interest” would curtail its international investments, and that would be via coercion by BIG GOVERNMENT. Force, and gross distortion of the markets.

            That will have the OPPOSITE effect of “MEGA”. It would hurt millions of Americans, while benefiting a very few special interest groups. It is identical to the Bernie Sanders’ idea of trade policy, and the wet dream of unions for decades.

    You know who else is targeting Cruz’ seat? McConnell and the GOPe.
    Take a look at the list of announced candidates for the 10 GOP seats up in 2018, and you’ll find three categories:
    1) GOP Senators with no GOP primary opposition (about 7 of them).
    2) Special circumstance elections like retirement/resignations. Everyone thinks that’s their meal ticket, so there are lots of challengers.
    3) Ted Cruz: a popular Senator who Bannon said he wouldn’t primary. Yet strangely, he has at least two primary opponents.

    McConnell just lost us a seat in Alabama. Is there no end to this man’s treachery?

    Allow me to amend my previous post:

    Cruz has FIVE GOP challengers and two independents!
    I hope they burn all of their donors’ money and their reputations up in the effort.

    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