Quote:New York Times, and I'm not sure you read, well, anything. I'm relating it to his ability to win the Presidency, something Cruz in particular could have done, and now we're going to be stuck with a bought and sold career politician who'll be father left than Obama instead of someone who will clean up some messes and change some policy.


You have no idea how much I'm looking forward to dealing with a Clinton/Warren CFPB. Half the financial industry will give up and walk away as revenue streams cut off by government interference are not replaced by other income sources because, well, because [BAD WORD REMOVED] head Cordray decides that no consumer should ever have to pay for anything or be held accountantable for their own decisions.

I don't think Cruz would have had any chance of winning. He is a religious nutcase and aligns himself with religious nut cases. If you don't get on your knees and pray everyday you aren't fit to be President... One could make a very good argument that a majority of the world's conflicts and problems are exactly because people get on their hands and knees to pray. Anyways, I'd much rather have a President who bases his actions on logic and not belief. One of his endorsements Pastor Swanson said to kill the gays and the death penalty was justified bases in a verse in the Bible. He did not denounce that belief and simply said it was a mistake to go to that conference, but only after pressure mounted. I would have at least respected him more if he stuck to his guns and said I'm not apologizing (not that he cares).

---