Topic category:  Elections - Politics, Polling, etc.

The announcement by Ted Cruz that he may "unsuspend" his campaign should he win Nebraska's primary today is pathetic.

Cruz was my main man (along with Carson and Fiorina), but they all lost to Trump.

Cruz cut his own throat with horrible advice from incompetent advisors. He should NEVER have responded to ANY Trump remarks. Not directly, and not indirectly. Doing so only played into Trump's strategy.

Had Cruz stayed on message and not made the huge mistake of going after Trump and then trying to work a deal with Kasich to get a two-man race in different states, he'd still be in the race, possibly even leading. But just how out of touch does Cruz have to be to think getting back in after a Nebraska victory would work well for him?

No, it wasn’t the name-calling that got Trump where he is. It was the foolish attempts by his opponents to respond to the name-calling instead of staying on their message.

And now this silliness of announcing a return to the race depending on what happens in… Nebraska??? What the heck is going on? There is NO upside to that announcement. None. Nada. Zilch.

If Trump wins Nebraska, it’s another embarrassment for Cruz. If Trump loses Nebraska (to Cruz), whoop-dee-doo… a smattering of delegates that really won’t make much difference in the long run.

It is weak and a betrayal to his supporters.

Cruz should have been a statesman, swallowed his pride, and when he conceded/suspended after Indiana, he should have offered his full support to Trump. That would have worked to unite the party, Trump would have been indebted to him, and it would have opened the door to cooperation with Cruz having some influence over the course Trump plotted to win in November and govern afterward. And don’t think Trump cannot blow out whomever the Democrats nominate, PARTICULARLY Ms. Clinton, who continues to sink like a lead balloon.

In refusing to swallow his pride and offering to work harmoniously with Trump, Cruz not only forsakes his supporters, he alienates the enormous following Trump has from those who have been sitting on the sidelines for many cycles as the GOP continued to put up wishy-washy candidates for President.

Do you think that John McCain is a true conservative? How about Geo. H. W. Bush? You know, the guy who called Reaganomics “voodoo economics”. How about Geo. W. Bush? Ya think he was a real “conservative”? Or Mitt Romney? Ya think HE was a “conservative”? I doubt they even know what it IS to be a conservative. They all learned with the Reagan years that there was political advantage claiming to be "conservative" so that's just what they did. But that is ALL they did. And I doubt many of those “Republicans” who ran or succeeded to the presidency after Reagan really have any clue about limited federal power prescribed by our Constitution (unless they were clued in by someone) and what it means to be a conservative.

So this nonsense about Trump not having a “conservative pedigree” is just silly and misguided. Work WITH him. Harmony works. Acrimony DOES NOT.

The folks at National Review and The Weekly Standard who are so childishly wallowing in self-pity and phony umbrage over Trump's success are only marginalizing themselves. They are behaving like spoiled brats who are sore losers.

My advice to them is to get over it and work with those millions of people who’ve given Trump the greatest number of primary votes in GOP history. And he did it against the largest field in history.

These clowns who run around saying, “yeah, but he didn’t get a majority” fail to account for the fact that with so many candidate choices, it would be HIGHLY UNLIKELY for ANYONE to be able to achieve a majority, particularly when so many candidates were in the race for so long. Now Trump is getting very large majorities, well over 50%. So how is that tune playing NOW?

The sore losers need to put their own pique aside and turn to cooperation and help as the best way to assure that Donald Trump is our next president and that the conservatives movement is a big part of shaping his administration.

Or they can sit on the sidelines and continue to pout like a sore loser and achieve nothing but, possibly, a Clinton victory.

Just how good would THAT be for the conservative movement? Or our country?

Bob Webster
WEBCommentary (Editor, Publisher)

Biography - Bob Webster

Author of "Looking Out the Window", an evidence-based examination of the "climate change" issue, Bob Webster, is a 12th-generation descendent of both the Darte family (Connecticut, 1630s) and the Webster family (Massachusetts, 1630s). He is a descendant of Daniel Webster's father, Revolutionary War patriot Ebenezer Webster, who served with General Washington. Bob has always had a strong interest in early American history, our Constitution, U.S. politics, and law. Politically he is a constitutional republican with objectivist and libertarian roots. He has faith in the ultimate triumph of truth and reason over deception and emotion. He is a strong believer in our Constitution as written and views the abandonment of constitutional restraint by the regressive Progressive movement as a great danger to our Republic. His favorite novel is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and believes it should be required reading for all high school students so they can appreciate the cost of tolerating the growth of unconstitutional crushingly powerful central government. He strongly believes, as our Constitution enshrines, that the interests of the individual should be held superior to the interests of the state.

A lifelong interest in meteorology and climatology spurred his strong interest in science. Bob earned his degree in Mathematics at Virginia Tech, graduating in 1964.