Slashdot Mirror


Ted Cruz Drops Out Of The Republican Presidential Race (washingtonpost.com)

rmdingler writes: Ted Cruz drops out of the presidential race after losing in Indiana. Donald Trump has become the presumptive nominee before Hillary has locked things up versus Bernie. This is huge. Cruz's decision to drop out came after losing significantly to Trump in the Indiana primary. "I said I would continue on as long as there is a viable path to victory. Tonight I'm sorry to say, it appears that path has been foreclosed," Cruz told a small group of supporters Tuesday night. "Together we left it all on the field in Indiana. We gave it everything we got, but the voters chose another path." He said he would "continue to fight for liberty," but did not say whether or not he would support Trump as the nominee. The exit comes soon after he announced former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina as his running mate in a desperate move to keep his candidacy afloat.

31 of 879 comments (clear)

  1. R. Daneel Olivaw for President! by DanDD · · Score: 5, Funny

    R. Daneel Olivaw for President!

    --
    "Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race." - H. G. Wells
  2. And Carly Destroys Another Organization.... by sconeu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Namely "Cruz for President"

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:And Carly Destroys Another Organization.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh come on, the org was already doomed before she was on board

    2. Re:And Carly Destroys Another Organization.... by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I have some things to say about Carly that didn't really get said because she wasn't ever a serious enough candidate. A few words got out on the Christian Science Monitor here. Sorry about the survey they put you through before you can read the article.

    3. Re:And Carly Destroys Another Organization.... by nmb3000 · · Score: 5, Informative

      That didn't stop her from jumping on that train, even when the imminent derailment was in sight.

      Must be nobody told her there wasn't another $40 million golden parachute at the end of this failure.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
  3. He knew what was going to happen ... by scunc · · Score: 5, Funny

    Considering how he now has to lay off his entire campaign staff, picking Carly Fiorina as his running mate looks more and more like a brilliant decision!

  4. "Huge" isn't what I'd say by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wouldn't say "Huge". I'd say a %$%^$ nightmare. Except that it may have done some good in showing the Republican party and their deep-pocket funders like the Koch brothers where a race to the bottom eventually gets them.

    Where does this take us? Trump is going to score well in conservative White districts, and Clinton (yes, I like Sanders, but he doesn't have the delegates) is going to score well enough to beat him with less conservative Whites and everyone else. I don't know if enough people would have voted for Clinton without someone who inspires people to vote against him like Trump. But even people who would in another situation never have voted for Clinton will cast votes against Trump. Clinton just got handed the White House. Game over.

    What really troubles me is what happens after the election. 40 years of anti-intellectualism and pandering to prejudice and we got a significant part of the country voting for someone who really would not have been good for the country. The historical parallels are obvious. What do we do now?

    1. Re:"Huge" isn't what I'd say by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Except that it may have done some good in showing the Republican party and their deep-pocket funders like the Koch brothers where a race to the bottom eventually gets them.

      I'm hoping this election cycle results in the GOP splitting in two. The racists, fascists, and religious fundamentalists can be loaded into one party while the sane Republicans who don't mind working WITH people on the opposite side of the aisle to get things done can be in a second party. The Sane GOP can take their place as one of the two major parties while the "Crazy GOP" can provide us with a few laughs at their expense as they spiral into oblivion. (The Democrats have their own extremists that need to be purged, but I don't think it's gotten to "party splitting" level quite yet.)

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:"Huge" isn't what I'd say by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only reason for super delegates is that the parties are private clubs and make their own rules. Geez, even the Republicans don't have them.

      I'd put super delegates after the electoral college on the list of insults to democracy. One person - one vote isn't a radical idea.

    3. Re:"Huge" isn't what I'd say by shanen · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, the so-called Republican Party has already split itself into at least 5 factions, but two of them are pretty much extinct. The extinct (or possibly just extremely endangered) species were the progressive Republicans (of the Abe Lincoln stripe) and the pragmatic conservatives (like Ike and Teddy). The currently dominant species is the former Dixiecrats (AKA pre-Reagan Southern Democrats AKA "Remember the War of Northern Aggression" Anti-Republicans). They dominate the major subspecies of religious fanatics (who hoped to push their morals on everyone else) and the minor subspecies of extremely short-sighted super-greedy businessmen (who thought investing in the cheapest professional politicians to rig the rules wouldn't cause corporate cancer). Today's fake Republicans are walking dead.

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  5. Re:Checkmate by thesupraman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So, you are convinced that yours is the lesser of two evils? Are you sure?

    There appears to be a choice between someone who is conniving and self serving, and someone who is nasty and under handed.

    Can you tell which is which?

    Will be interesting to watch from a distance, but is there enough distance? hmmm..

  6. there is a perfectly valid reason. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Funny

    As a political analyst its simple to understand why a ted cruz candidacy was untenable. We simply need to look at the facts.

    1. total Co2 in the earths atmosphere is around .04%. now, while this number is rising at an alarming rate, is nowhere near the 34% required for Ted Cruz to survive outside his spacecraft. his inability to handle Nitrogen and Oxygen perhaps cost him valuable facetime with the american people. Any reasonable subterranean intergalactic cephalopod species could surely identify with the all too common problem of our atmosphere and its no reason to think Ted didnt understand this problem acutely.

    2. The mindgasm with Carly Fiorina was tentative, as the aetherial fluids clearly hadnt been administered yet and the nanites had no substrate on which to build the newmind. Carly lacked ambition, determination, and a plan. Most importantly, she lacked the void stare, obedient subservience, and slow speech and gait that are all classic telltale signs of "the syrum." Of course Ted could have used the mindworms, but its unlikely a true fiscal conservative would take to using them. Theyre just too costly in a campaign.

    3. despite liberal restucturing in the identity chamber, teds human form was too precitable and beginning to arouse suspicion of his youthful, larval past as the zodiac killer. Had he simply taken the time to explain that humans are a complete nutritional delicacy for his species and that 4-5 are required to exit the larval stage and return to the hivemind, most conservatives would have viewed this as a good leadership quality.

    so heres hoping the Yaylaka prince Don-Al of Ukador persei 9, commonly known as "Don-Al Trumph" does better. and before you bash the candidate, its worth remembering his speech seems to approximate normal english almost 60% of the time! Quite an achievement if youve never slid into a humanform that may or may not have been a long haul trucker from illinois whos been missing for 36 years and presumed dead. I think we can all agree when he says "hail Ji-Ban-Lau forever" he means it.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  7. Re:Checkmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pretty much. Clinton is delusional if she thinks after all the insulting things she's said about the Bernie supporters and the various dirty campaigning practices that she's going to get all of us to toe the line. I for one will not vote for that woman. If that means President Trump, then so be it. We can survive 4 years of Trump, I'm not sure we can survive the precedent of letting somebody as pathologically dishonest as Clinton to win.

    Just the other day it came out that she's been using the Hillary Clinton Victory fund to funnel donations well above and beyond the legal limit into her campaign coffers. Roughly 99% of the money that was donated, ostensibly for the party and other Democrats has been funneled back into her campaign.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/clinton-fundraising-leaves-little-for-state-parties-222670

    Is that really better than what Trump can do for us? I doubt very much that he really believes most of the inflammatory rhetoric.

  8. Wait, wait by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wait a second...

    Rafael Cruz AND Glen Beck both said Ted Cruz was "anointed by god" to be the next president. How could god have gotten it so wrong??

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  9. You misunderstand who is disliked more by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Trump has a lot of negatives, yes.

    And that might matter - if he were not running against Clinton.

    Read Looking back: How Trump Beat Hillary

    It's pretty amusing how much your posts parallels all of the people claiming Trump had no chance of winning the Republican nomination... The fact is you simply do not understand the vast majority of voters, women and men, white and black, hispanic or any other racial groups.

    You've not even factored in how much more strongly Trump is against big banks than Clinton is (not hard to do since the Democrats have for some time been deeply intertwined with the likes of Goldman Sachs, which Trump has taken very little money from banks and has a natural animosity towards them having had to go through them in dealing with business ventures).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  10. Wrong mate by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trump is literally going to plaster the walls with Hillary, after the first debate that all become apparent even to you... I doubt Hillary will do more than one open debate, and then where will the reclusive sulking get her? Exactly nowhere.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Wrong mate by Marginal+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think one thing we've learned from all this is it's not about money, it's about airtime. And if you can get that for free, it no longer matters which side the Koch brothers are on - which somehow is kind of reassuring, despite the obvious negative consequences in this case.

      I've watched a lot of CNN throughout all this, and they're clearly biased against Trump. Yet they've fueled his campaign with the wall-to-wall free airtime they give him. (And yes, as a CNN viewer, I'm part of the problem.) In fact, on their "Reliable Sources" program the other day, someone mentioned that CNN's ratings were up dramatically throughout all this, which isn't surprising. It's a win-win for both: Trump gets airtime, CNN gets ratings. I guess we could call that the "media-troll complex."

  11. Re:Hillary vs Trump by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You're ignoring the fact that now that he has the nomination, he's free to move to the center and make nice with women, blacks and mexicans. Anything can still happen.

  12. Re:It's a trap by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

    He's not dead yet.

    He's undead.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  13. Re: Checkmate by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Regardless of how self serving or fraudulent you may think she is, the odds of Hilary accidentally plunging the whole planet into world War three due to ineptitude seems significantly lower than with Trump.

    The great majority (if not all) of wars was caused by self-serving leaders, and never by incompetence. Psychopatic minds only interested in their own benefit, financial and political, have been the motive force behind practically all wars in recorded history.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  14. Re:Hillary vs Trump by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I suspect you will see his policies shift, but not in any way that allows for easy categorization. But there is one thing that Trump is very very good at which is he is a mainstream media prediction killer. From pretty much day one every prediction about him by the mainstream media has gone up in smoke. The initial prediction that I read about his campaign was that it would last just long enough for him to promote his show or a book.

  15. Re:Hillary vs Trump by Wycliffe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Exactly. It's kindof scary that the most likely next president is hated by 75+% of the population. At least with Sanders or Kasich, the other side of the aisle tolerates them. I'm a republican/libertarian and disagree with most of what Sanders believes but I still think that he is a decent human being. I can't say the same about Hillary or Trump. If it was Kasich vs Hillary, I would vote for Kasich, if it was Trump vs Sanders, I would vote for Sanders, but Hillary vs Trump and I have no idea who to vote. We're either going to have one of the highest turnouts or lowest turnouts in voting history and most people are going to be voting *against* a candidate instead of for a candidate.

  16. Re: Can Trump win over all? by Alomex · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually Obama has issued the lowest number of executive orders per year of office since William McKinley in 1901.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  17. Re:Can Trump win over all? by Alomex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Like her husband, she can't seem to do anything without breaking some type of law.

    Except that in 25 years of accusations not one has stuck. At some point a rational person has to start wondering if there is anything there there. Or you can continue parroting partisan talking points that as I said, haven't panned out in 25 years.

  18. Re:It's a trap by shanen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Again, I wish I had a funny mod point to give you.

    Anyway, as bad as Trump is, Cruz would have been worse. The Donald's primary identity is "con man" or "salesman" and he doesn't believe most of the crazy stuff he says. He's just saying those things because the suckers want to hear them. In contrast, Cruz's primary personal identity is "religious fanatic", supported by a secondary identity as "technically skilled liar", and he sincerely believed all of the crazy stuff he said, and some more besides.

    Trump's nomination actually gives me some hope for the future of America. The so-called Republican Party has become a travesty of itself. Just an insane brand hijack of the actual Republican Party of Abe Lincoln and the pragmatic if overly business-friendly GOP of Ike and Teddy. It is overdue to follow the Whig and Federalists Parties into oblivion so the American political system can have a REAL choice. Yeah, the Democratic Party will win too easily, but it's not like they've ever been able to figure out what they want to do with political power even when they have it. I doubt the new challenger will be the Libertarian Party, but the election of 2018 may reveal which way things are actually going. Hey, it's even conceivable the so-called Republicans can reform themselves enough to earn their own name again.

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  19. Personal identity is important! by shanen · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Can't say I like Hillary that much, but there is one major aspect I do like: She has excellent taste in enemies. Not saying that the enemy of my enemy is automatically my friend, but her loudest and most prominent enemies are on the scale from "despicable" to totally "despicable". I'm liking her more and more just for the nasty things the flagrant bastards say about her.

    The second thing I rather like about her candidacy is that she is obviously vastly more qualified and competent than Trump (or Cruz) and significantly better than any of the other prominent candidates the so-called Republicans were considering. If they had found a candidate like Abe Lincoln, Teddy, or Ike, today's fake Republicans would have booed him out of the first debate.

    The main reason I still prefer Bernie is that his primary personal identity is "idealist", and I think they are basically harmless compared to most of the alternatives. Hillary's #1 identity is probably "corporate lawyer" and "idealist" probably isn't in her top 10. I'm not sure "politician" is in the top 5, but she has Bill on her side, and his clear #1 is "politician", so I think she's covered there. (President Obama is also a primary politician, if you ask me, and I regard that as a bad (but evidently almost absolute) requirement for the office these years. I think Carter and Ford were the last exceptions.)

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  20. Re:Hillary vs Trump by suupaabaka · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's funny that the American version of "extreme leftist" looks somewhat centrist from a European/Australian perspective.

  21. 3rd party by bangular · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If those that dislike Hillary and Trump voted for a single 3rd party candidate, they'd probably win. I'm a Bernie supporter that has decided to vote 3rd party. I've heard "you're wasting your vote" every time I've mentioned it. I don't care at this point. It's the only way we'll ever buck the current two party system.

  22. Re:Hillary vs Trump by dbIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bernie is so far to the left he makes Hillary look like a Republican

    Richard Nixon was so far to the left that he would have made Hillary look like a Republican!
    I wish it was a joke but with the EPA, his health care proposals and a few other things he would be called a Communist by some Republicans if he was pushing such things today. That was of course before Koch and other similar donors made the demands that shaped current politics.

  23. Re:It's a trap by Malc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a foreigner who doesn't even live in the US, perhaps you could help me understand how the "evil" of Clinton will damage the country? From here it looks like Trump is already causing damage in international relations and domestically in terms of fuelling bigotry and hate. I suppose with Clinton we should expect a presidency distracted by the GOP going after her for an impeachment like her husband (mail server instead of Lewinsky)?

  24. Re:Does the Donald stand for anything? by eam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would point out that the gullible trump supporters are somewhat more complex than that. They believe that Trump means the things he says that they agree with, and they believe that he does not really mean the things he says that they disagree with. They are absolutely convinced of his dishonesty, yet they somehow think he's on their side.

    NPR's This American Life did a segment about Alex Chalgren, an african-american, gay Trump supporter. In the segment, Alex explained that he supported Trump because Trump supported gay rights. Later when confronted by a statement from Trump saying that he would try to appoint judges to overrule the decision on same-sex marriage, he continued to defend Trump. He said that Trump only made the statement to get votes.

    Trump rejected the one issue that Alex chose him for, and Alex continued to support him.

    http://www.thisamericanlife.or...