TV Ad - Have Your Back

It really doesn't matter what I say, you are a liberal and you will take the liberal talking points over anything I provide. It's just who you are. if you really wanted to know who is the best for the country, look who is being attacked by both sides of the aisle. in this case it's Cruz. Since I'll be getting blocked by you anyway, why do you care what I think? Have a nice day.

From: 7 Reasons Why Liberals are Incapable of Understanding the World
1) Liberalism creates a feedback loop. It is usually impossible for a non-liberal to change a liberal's mind about political issues because liberalism works like so: only liberals are credible sources of information. How do you know someone's liberal? He espouses liberal doctrine. So, no matter how plausible what you say may be, it will be ignored if you're not a liberal and if you are a liberal, of course, you probably agree with liberal views. This sort of close-mindedness makes liberals nearly impervious to any information that might undermine their beliefs.
2) Liberals sources of information are ever present. Conservatives are regularly exposed to the liberal viewpoint whether they want to be or not. That's not necessarily so for liberals. Imagine the average day for liberals. They get up and read their local newspaper. It has a liberal viewpoint. They take their kids to school, where the teachers are liberal. Then they go to work, listen to NPR which has a liberal viewpoint on the way home, and then turn on the nightly news which also skews leftward. From there, they turn on TV and watch shows created by liberals that lean to the left, if they have any political viewpoint at all. Unless liberals actively seek out conservative viewpoints, which is unlikely, the only conservative arguments they're probably going to hear are going to be through the heavily distorted, poorly translated, deeply skeptical lens of other liberals.

Cpl (Join to see) - i won't block you; I'm not afraid of being exposed to ideas I don't agree with. And I'm not the liberal you may think I am. I just have an interest in the way mis and disinformation is used in politics. Must be the PSYOPer in me. I hear a lot of accusations and proclamations about this or that, but most of the time the people making them haven't actually examined the sources of their info.

I notice you still haven't described what you think Ted would do differently about the sailor situation or what you think his "I have your back" in that regard actually means. It's like the way every repub candidate said the same thing "I'm glad they were returned, but I wouldn't have traded for them like Obama because it makes us look weak". Fine, if that's what they believe, great. But then please tell us, Mr Candidates, what alternative solution you would have used to get the sailors back. What would you actually have done? Not cute phrases like "I would have had their back" but what would you have specifically ordered done? But they never answer that.

It's a habit you see with them. The first day I will repeal Obamacare. OK, what exactly are you going to replace it with on Day 2? How exactly are you going to go about actually deporting 12 million undocumented immigrants? A special police force? It's going to take a lot of buses. So whenever I hear people criticize Obama for taking this action or that, I just wonder "what would you have done instead?"

I won't presume to know Senator Cruz, nor his thoughts. I also won't speculate on his appointments and how he would handle advice from his military advisers. Tough talk and good advice can go a very long way. When Reagan took office, it didn't take long for the Iranian hostages to get released. BO, just like Carter, is not respected, globally. Reagan was.

Additionally, I haven't heard Senator Cruz use the "I, me, my" pronouns the same way the current pResedent uses those words. I suspect a President Cruz would be much more likely to heed advice from the experts unlike the current potus. Your theory is speculative and argumentative. Again, the left attacked Reagan for the same things and WW III still didn't happen. The attacks against Senator Cruz are following the same tactics.

If you can't name his possible appointments of who he would be receiving advice, you are just theorizing and attempting to sway peoples choice using fear.

I was in Europe when Reagan, my commander in chief was in office. Most Europeans hated him, didn't respect him. Protests all over the place. I was an MP and had to help keep order.

What would you want to hear that you think is missing from the field?

I'm more of the "actions speak louder than words". Taking potshots at the "rival" party and then using current events to do that is just typical political BS.

LTC Kevin B. - I understand what you're saying... ideally we have a candidate who is both of strong character and of an ideology consistent with your own values. For me, simply being genuine is not nearly sufficient to be seriously considered. I rather have somebody who supports American ideals but plays politics before we have a communist who is really really genuine about his ideas for example. It's a bit of an extreme, but it conveys the point. There are many rulers throughout history who were really consistent and genuine, but I think they would deserve the death penalty before they would get my vote.

LTC Yinon Weiss - That's why I added the comment about preferring divided government. One of the great things about our form of government is that someone on the extremes can't implement their ideology without complicit Legislative and Judicial Branches. I don't want those pendulum swings in either direction. In essence, our system neuters those extreme ideologies.

LTC Kevin B. - It often does, and we have our Founding Fathers to thank for you that. I still wouldn't want a President with an extreme ideology counter to ideas I value, no matter how much character he has. For example, I wouldn't want a socialist in the White House, no matter how much he really believes in socialism. Character is a requirement, but it is far from being sufficient.

LTC Yinon Weiss - I don't vote for character while ignoring ideology. Character is necessary, but not sufficient. As long as their ideology is at least somewhat aligned with the issues that are most important to me, and as long as any objectionable issues can be muted by the opposition, then the ideology quickly takes a back seat to character.