What a Ted Cruz victory would mean (1 Viewer)

[bigbottom]

I have some insight here.My good friend (the one who writes movies that I've discussed here before) was Cruz's freshman roommate at Princeton. He says unabashedly that Cruz is the single biggest ###hole walking the Earth today. I remember talking to him when I was a senior in HS and he was a frosh at Princeton and him telling me that he was loving school except that his roommate was a total ##### that he hated from day 1. He said the guy was the single most insufferable, pompous, self-serving jerk he's ever had the displeasure of knowing. He recently used the words "awful, awful human being" to describe him.So there's that.

Now THAT, I believe.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I have some insight here.My good friend (the one who writes movies that I've discussed here before) was Cruz's freshman roommate at Princeton. He says unabashedly that Cruz is the single biggest ###hole walking the Earth today. I remember talking to him when I was a senior in HS and he was a frosh at Princeton and him telling me that he was loving school except that his roommate was a total ##### that he hated from day 1. He said the guy was the single most insufferable, pompous, self-serving jerk he's ever had the displeasure of knowing. He recently used the words "awful, awful human being" to describe him.So there's that.

Now THAT, I believe.

The guy wrote Scary Movie 6 so you know he tells it like it is.

 

[Jewell]

Another Hispanic. La reconquista continues.

Only, this one's not a leftist, and loves the USA.

Link? Where he is the only one who loves the USA? You want to make a silly statement, then have some facts to back it up. please!Everyone that runs for office in this country loves the USA.. you may not agree with the politics, but if they are putting out their lives to be voted on then they love this great county.

It can be argued that the below infamous quote may reflect an animosity to present day America, an animosity to a major part of present day America, or may evidence the Reconquista sentiment that DiStefano referenced...

This is a sentence taken from a statement given by Art Torres, a fomer California State Assembly member and State Senator, at the UC Riverside conference referenced above:

"It is an honor to be with the new leadership of the Americas, here meeting at UC Riverside. So with 187 on the ballot, what is it going to take for our people to vote, to see us walking into the gas ovens? It is electoral power that is going to make the determination of where we go as a community. And power is not given to you; you have to take it. Remember: 187 is the last gasp of white America in California. Understand that. And people say to me on the Senate floor when I was in the Senate, 'Why do you fight so hard for affirmative action programs?' And I tell my white colleagues, 'because you're going to need them'[laughter].

NOTE: A month after making this statement, Art Torres was appointed Chairman of the California Democratic Party, a position he held until 2009.

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/hispanicleaders.asp#jth7fF7hLPJpDREj.99

 

[oso diablo]

I have some insight here.My good friend (the one who writes movies that I've discussed here before) was Cruz's freshman roommate at Princeton. He says unabashedly that Cruz is the single biggest ###hole walking the Earth today. I remember talking to him when I was a senior in HS and he was a frosh at Princeton and him telling me that he was loving school except that his roommate was a total ##### that he hated from day 1. He said the guy was the single most insufferable, pompous, self-serving jerk he's ever had the displeasure of knowing. He recently used the words "awful, awful human being" to describe him.So there's that.

sounds like Cruz found the right job then

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I have some insight here.My good friend (the one who writes movies that I've discussed here before) was Cruz's freshman roommate at Princeton. He says unabashedly that Cruz is the single biggest ###hole walking the Earth today. I remember talking to him when I was a senior in HS and he was a frosh at Princeton and him telling me that he was loving school except that his roommate was a total ##### that he hated from day 1. He said the guy was the single most insufferable, pompous, self-serving jerk he's ever had the displeasure of knowing. He recently used the words "awful, awful human being" to describe him.So there's that.

Now THAT, I believe.

The guy wrote Scary Movie 6 so you know he tells it like it is.

3 and 4 actually. And yeah, he does - this guy is about as straight a shooter as I've ever known. He also doesn't throw words like "awful human being" around lightly. He told me a couple of weeks ago that Cruz is the most "arrogant and despicable person [he has] ever met" and this guy works in the film industry in Hollywood, where supposedly the concentration of arrogant and despicable people is about as high as anywhere else on the globe.

 

[timschochet]

I have some insight here.My good friend (the one who writes movies that I've discussed here before) was Cruz's freshman roommate at Princeton. He says unabashedly that Cruz is the single biggest ###hole walking the Earth today. I remember talking to him when I was a senior in HS and he was a frosh at Princeton and him telling me that he was loving school except that his roommate was a total ##### that he hated from day 1. He said the guy was the single most insufferable, pompous, self-serving jerk he's ever had the displeasure of knowing. He recently used the words "awful, awful human being" to describe him.So there's that.

This in itself doesn't make him a bad politician. It's an unfortunate fact that almost all of these guys are jerks on both sides of the aisle. I don't like Cruz because I despise his politics. Whether he is a good or bad person, who knows?

 

[Evilgrin 72]

I have some insight here.

My good friend (the one who writes movies that I've discussed here before) was Cruz's freshman roommate at Princeton. He says unabashedly that Cruz is the single biggest ###hole walking the Earth today. I remember talking to him when I was a senior in HS and he was a frosh at Princeton and him telling me that he was loving school except that his roommate was a total ##### that he hated from day 1. He said the guy was the single most insufferable, pompous, self-serving jerk he's ever had the displeasure of knowing. He recently used the words "awful, awful human being" to describe him.

So there's that.

This in itself doesn't make him a bad politician. It's an unfortunate fact that almost all of these guys are jerks on both sides of the aisle. I don't like Cruz because I despise his politics. Whether he is a good or bad person, who knows?

I'm not commenting on his worth or lack thereof as a politician. To be honest, I know very little about him, particularly in that respect. I'm not really a big politics guy to begin with.Whether he is a good or bad person, I feel like I do know. I trust my friend's judgment of people implicitly, and it's not confined to him, whenever he posts about Cruz on facebook or Twitter I see myriad responses from other Princeton alums who universally echo the same sentiments.

 

[eaganwildcats]

I have some insight here.

My good friend (the one who writes movies that I've discussed here before) was Cruz's freshman roommate at Princeton. He says unabashedly that Cruz is the single biggest ###hole walking the Earth today. I remember talking to him when I was a senior in HS and he was a frosh at Princeton and him telling me that he was loving school except that his roommate was a total ##### that he hated from day 1. He said the guy was the single most insufferable, pompous, self-serving jerk he's ever had the displeasure of knowing. He recently used the words "awful, awful human being" to describe him.

So there's that.

This in itself doesn't make him a bad politician. It's an unfortunate fact that almost all of these guys are jerks on both sides of the aisle. I don't like Cruz because I despise his politics. Whether he is a good or bad person, who knows?

It would appear the good friend knows. And it is reasonable to assume his being an awful human being has a fairly direct correlation to his support of the policies you find despicable.

 

[eaganwildcats]

Also, I found myself watching one of Cruz' debates before his senate election and got to witness this doozy of an exchange:“I do think that part of the philosophy of President Obama and this administration is trying to get as many Americans as possible dependent on government so the Democrats can stay in power in perpetuity,” Cruz said.“That’s the craziest thing I ever heard in my life,” Sadler said. “You really are accusing the president of the United States of using a government program to manipulate people to not get a job, to be dependent on government for services? Are you really accusing the president of the United States of that? That’s just crazy, Ted.”

 

[timschochet]

I have some insight here.

My good friend (the one who writes movies that I've discussed here before) was Cruz's freshman roommate at Princeton. He says unabashedly that Cruz is the single biggest ###hole walking the Earth today. I remember talking to him when I was a senior in HS and he was a frosh at Princeton and him telling me that he was loving school except that his roommate was a total ##### that he hated from day 1. He said the guy was the single most insufferable, pompous, self-serving jerk he's ever had the displeasure of knowing. He recently used the words "awful, awful human being" to describe him.

So there's that.

This in itself doesn't make him a bad politician. It's an unfortunate fact that almost all of these guys are jerks on both sides of the aisle. I don't like Cruz because I despise his politics. Whether he is a good or bad person, who knows?

It would appear the good friend knows. And it is reasonable to assume his being an awful human being has a fairly direct correlation to his support of the policies you find despicable.

Maybe. But personally I know several Tea Party types whom I consider to be wonderful people.

 

[Joe T]

Weird, I know a few left wing liberal types that are wonderful people.

 

[eaganwildcats]

Yeah, I should probably walk that one back a bit. I really just cannot stand this guy - clouds my vision a bit from time to time.

 

[Sand]

Also, I found myself watching one of Cruz' debates before his senate election and got to witness this doozy of an exchange:“I do think that part of the philosophy of President Obama and this administration is trying to get as many Americans as possible dependent on government so the Democrats can stay in power in perpetuity,” Cruz said.“That’s the craziest thing I ever heard in my life,” Sadler said. “You really are accusing the president of the United States of using a government program to manipulate people to not get a job, to be dependent on government for services? Are you really accusing the president of the United States of that? That’s just crazy, Ted.”

Absolutely - not sure how there is any disagreement with Cruz's statement there.

 

[Sand]

Weird, I know a few left wing liberal types that are wonderful people.

True - they're always good for some free herb.

 

[[icon]]

until TX finally goes blue.

 

[SacramentoBob]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

 

[Aerial Assault]

Princeton and Harvard Law grad? Yeah, whatever.

Clerked on the Fourth Circuit? Sure, he had good grades. Whatevs.

Clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist? No big woop. He hires based on ideology, not merit.

Solicitor General of Texas? Conservative version of affirmative action in action there.

Private practice for an international firm where he led the firm's U.S. Supreme Court and appellate litigation practice? Pshaw! His home office was in Houston for Pete's sake.

And he's done all this at a relatively young age? Only because he keeps failing upwards!

What about his posts at the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, not to mention teaching Supreme Court litigation for five years at UT Law? Not backpedaling! No qualifications whatsoever!

Attack him for being a fool, or for his crazy stances. But belittling his credentials and qualifications as if they are they are meaningless is not particularly effective.

Oof. Guess I hit a little too close to home here, for which I apologize. But yes, it is actually possible to have a great resume and be unqualified to hold high federal office. That is Cruz's situation, particularly if you delve a little deeper into that resume. But since I've taught Supreme Court litigation, I'll certainly ready my Senate campaign. And what's this bit about "attack him for being a fool, not for his qualifications" business? Yes. He's not particularly impressive in person, so I conclude that he is not qualified to be a senator, despite your sort of funny swooning over his resume. Anyway. Oh, and don't ask Ted if Harvard Law was impressive; place was filled with teh radicalz!!!! So you might not get the right answer.

Cruz actually has a lot in common with Clarence Thomas, another guy whose resume probably looked pretty good at first glance back in 1991.

 

[Aerial Assault]

until TX finally goes blue.

You're laughing at this idea? Yikes. Read up a touch.

 

[bigbottom]

Princeton and Harvard Law grad? Yeah, whatever.

Clerked on the Fourth Circuit? Sure, he had good grades. Whatevs.

Clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist? No big woop. He hires based on ideology, not merit.

Solicitor General of Texas? Conservative version of affirmative action in action there.

Private practice for an international firm where he led the firm's U.S. Supreme Court and appellate litigation practice? Pshaw! His home office was in Houston for Pete's sake.

And he's done all this at a relatively young age? Only because he keeps failing upwards!

What about his posts at the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, not to mention teaching Supreme Court litigation for five years at UT Law? Not backpedaling! No qualifications whatsoever!

Attack him for being a fool, or for his crazy stances. But belittling his credentials and qualifications as if they are they are meaningless is not particularly effective.

Oof. Guess I hit a little too close to home here, for which I apologize.

I have very little in common with Cruz. Why would this hit too close to home?

But yes, it is actually possible to have a great resume and be unqualified to hold high federal office. That is Cruz's situation, particularly if you delve a little deeper into that resume.

I've summarized the counterpoints you've offered in this thread in the post above. If there's more to it than the shallow dismissiveness you've given it thus far, please share. I'm not a fan at all and would welcome more substantive criticism.

And what's this bit about "attack him for being a fool, not for his qualifications" business? Yes. He's not particularly impressive in person, so I conclude that he is not qualified to be a senator, despite your sort of funny swooning over his resume.

Have you interacted with him in person? If so, what was your takeaway? And I'm not swooning over his résumé, I'm listing the details of his résumé. You're the one making judgements about them and characterizing them as meaningless.

 

[Jewell]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

 

[bigbottom]

until TX finally goes blue.

You're laughing at this idea? Yikes. Read up a touch.

And when it happens, the GOP will be in a world of hurt.

 

[Thunderlips]

The fact that Cruz has been championed by Beck and Hannity tells me all I need to know about the guy. Real shame for the Republicans....I think they might have stood a chance with Chris Christie.

 

[oso diablo]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

Sooner than a million years? OK

 

[Jewell]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

Sooner than a million years? OK

California is as Democrat as a state can be. Mid-Twentieth Century California was solidly Republican and spawned Reagan and Nixon.I can't recall what figure said this nor the exact phrasing -- If you can't change the people's politics, change the people. That's what happened in California. That's what wil happen in Texas.

 

[roadkill1292]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

 

[bigbottom]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

 

[Jewell]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

So demographic shifts lead to changes? Are these changes always for the better or at least a neutral/lateral change or do some changes have a net negative effect?

 

[roadkill1292]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

So demographic shifts lead to changes? Are these changes always for the better or at least a neutral/lateral change or do some changes have a net negative effect?

Bugger off.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Lotsa rollies in here, not much substance. Standard FFA political thread, I guess.

His views are idiotic, but his resume is stellar.

 

[phrozen]

Lotsa rollies in here, not much substance. Standard FFA political thread, I guess.

What do you do for a living?

 

[SacramentoBob]

Oof. Guess I hit a little too close to home here, for which I apologize.

I have very little in common with Cruz. Why would this hit too close to home?

Don't you both live in Texas? That's a pretty solid connection there.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

 

[bigbottom]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

Yep. That wasn't my reason for moving from Cali, but it certainly offset the slight pay cut I took to make the move. But couple low tax rates, low cost of living, and wide open spaces, and it can definitely be attractive to the demographic you reference.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

Yep. That wasn't my reason for moving from Cali, but it certainly offset the slight pay cut I took to make the move. But couple low tax rates, low cost of living, and wide open spaces, and it can definitely be attractive to the demographic you reference.

We are thinking of moving there this year. She's a consultant and does healthcare software consulting. I work in IT and am looking to get into IT consulting. It seems like Houston and Dallas are two really good options. My director actually said that Dallas is one of the best places to live as a consultant because of the airport there. Any recommendations? Not really big on nightlife, but I would like to be able to do more than what is offered here which is basically bowling or going to the movies. Having a variety of quality ethnic/cultural food is a huge plus. I grew up in NJ and the options there compared to living in the south is just night and day.

 

[Soonerman]

until TX finally goes blue.

You're laughing at this idea? Yikes. Read up a touch.

And when it happens, the GOP USA will be in a world of hurt.

Fixed.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

Sooner than a million years? OK

They had a D governor when I lived there. Ann Richards against Clayton Williams was one of the craziest political races I've ever experienced.

 

[Joe T]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

Yep. That wasn't my reason for moving from Cali, but it certainly offset the slight pay cut I took to make the move. But couple low tax rates, low cost of living, and wide open spaces, and it can definitely be attractive to the demographic you reference.

We are thinking of moving there this year. She's a consultant and does healthcare software consulting. I work in IT and am looking to get into IT consulting. It seems like Houston and Dallas are two really good options. My director actually said that Dallas is one of the best places to live as a consultant because of the airport there. Any recommendations? Not really big on nightlife, but I would like to be able to do more than what is offered here which is basically bowling or going to the movies. Having a variety of quality ethnic/cultural food is a huge plus. I grew up in NJ and the options there compared to living in the south is just night and day.

There is nothing available.

 

[tommyboy]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

you say that like its a good thing. Isnt' it painfully obvious that going blue is a recipe for economic disaster. In fact, any democrat that can honestly compare california and texas and say california has a better government, better economy, and better freedom and opportunity for its citizens is either an abject liar or completely in denial of reality.

 

[jamny]

Mike Lee

 

[Aerial Assault]

Princeton and Harvard Law grad? Yeah, whatever.

Clerked on the Fourth Circuit? Sure, he had good grades. Whatevs.

Clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist? No big woop. He hires based on ideology, not merit.

Solicitor General of Texas? Conservative version of affirmative action in action there.

Private practice for an international firm where he led the firm's U.S. Supreme Court and appellate litigation practice? Pshaw! His home office was in Houston for Pete's sake.

And he's done all this at a relatively young age? Only because he keeps failing upwards!

What about his posts at the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, not to mention teaching Supreme Court litigation for five years at UT Law? Not backpedaling! No qualifications whatsoever!

Attack him for being a fool, or for his crazy stances. But belittling his credentials and qualifications as if they are they are meaningless is not particularly effective.

[ . . .]

I have very little in common with Cruz. Why would this hit too close to home?

Because after I posted and you took issue with it, I remembered, vaguely, that you are a lawyer in Texas. (If this is wrong, my apologies.) So for all I know Cruz is an acquaintance, colleague, or personal friend, and therefore what I said was insensitive. Anyway, apology stands if needed.

I've summarized the counterpoints you've offered in this thread in the post above. If there's more to it than the shallow dismissiveness you've given it thus far, please share. I'm not a fan at all and would welcome more substantive criticism.

I have no issue with Princeton or Harvard Law. In fact, a lot of what he did at Princeton in terms of debating is really impressive, even though he doesn't seem to trumpet those achievements.

I think I mistyped or was misunderstood above about clerking for Rehnquist. Rereading, I think I was unclear. Clerking for any SCOTUS judge is impressive no matter what. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.

Clerking for Luttig. In my opinion, Luttig hired for ideology. I have some real-world basis for this conclusion, but it's hardly needed; anyone doing a short Internet search can learn all about the "Luttigators" and how a really, really high percentage of them went on to clerk for Scalia or Thomas. It was a pipeline that had very little to do with merit, but Luttig was an interesting character, culminating with his tantrum of resigning from the Fourth Circuit in 2005 (?) when he was passed over, twice, for what he apparently viewed as a SCOTUS slot that was rightfully his. Anyway, clerking for Luttig does not impress me, and many a member of the "Fourth Circuit community" before Bush 2 sort of messed up and the court lost its leading-light-conservative status are long on political backgrounds and a little light on legal heft, and it's been that way for years and years. In any event, there are thousands of people who have clerked at the circuit court level who are better qualified than Cruz for high federal office.

Bush administration federal agency jobs don't impress me. The guy worked in a couple of agencies. Okay. Actually, considering his achievements at Harvard and the clerkships, his subsequent jobs out of school are kind of underwhelming.

The Texas solicitor general job was an appointed position that was made to a curiously young individual with, at the time, not much real appellate litigation experience. It was an intriguing appointment, to say the least, when you consider the kind of person who typically makes arguments in front of, say, the SCOTUS on behalf of states. That's my opinion, but it's also shared by others who are a lot more connected to Texas and know a heck of a lot more about it. But this is very much something that impresses Republicans and is encouraged by the Federalist Society as part of a process of grooming candidates for higher office: Kelly Ayotte is another good example (although she was at least elected). Usually, these people are spurred to go on to become judges, but with a Democratic president, that's off the table, so we have Cruz in the Senate. (I'm not sure why Ayottte never seemingly pursued a federal judgeship; perhaps she did, or perhaps she liked the executive and legislative branches better.)

Almost everything else Cruz has done flowed from the TX solicitor general position. If he had been hired at Morgan Lewis right out of law school (plus the clerking), that would impress me to some extent, colored by my personal views on that particular firm. But he wasn't. He was hired by Morgan Lewis as a very young partner in connection with a brand-new Houston office and had a practice group effectively created around him because (I assume) the firm presumably wanted to capitalize on his work for the State of Texas. There's nothing wrong with that and it happens all the time, but "national appellate litgation practices" not located in Washington aren't exactly high-prestige, and I can't be too impressed with this achievement. Ditto the teaching at Texas. I mean, good for him, but I don't normally automatically connect "law professor" with "should be a Senator."

Cruz evidently didn't enjoy his job in private practice too much, or he saw a good opportunity to climb, which is what he's been all about and is why he has "done so much" at "such a young age." Hence the Senate campaign when KBH retired. Actually, even with the long tenure in the TX SG position, he's been a bit of a job-jumper. Like Rubio, he's an example of the Republican nonfamilial nepotism machine that tends to gravitate, these days, towards minorities. (Rand Paul is an example of true, familial nepotism, but not involving minorities.) He was identified early as someone around whom the party could build, and here he is in the Senate. The system worked. The problem is that he isn't really well-qualified to be a U.S. Senator because he is a creature of that Republican machine.

Anyway, just my opinion and I'm sure reasonable minds can differ. And listen, as much as I hate the ideology, maybe the guy will be a good senator, sort of in the way that Orrin Hatch used to be a good senator. But the McCarthyite garbage and his performance in the Hagel nomination aren't good signs at this very early stage.

Have you interacted with him in person? If so, what was your takeaway? And I'm not swooning over his résumé, I'm listing the details of his résumé. You're the one making judgements about them and characterizing them as meaningless.

Sorry about the snark on my end. I have to punt on directly answering the question about personal interactions because this is a public forum, but suffice it to say that I have some basis for my conclusion that he's not the brightest bulb. And ironically, I also have some basis to dispute the opinion expressed above that he's a #### in person.Finally, at those (not you) disputing Texas' demographic future as if this is some well-kept secret.

 

[Sand]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

you say that like its a good thing. Isnt' it painfully obvious that going blue is a recipe for economic disaster. In fact, any democrat that can honestly compare california and texas and say california has a better government, better economy, and better freedom and opportunity for its citizens is either an abject liar or completely in denial of reality.

Not much different than Wisconsin and the immediate fiscal turnaround Walker has achieved. Here in Alabama, now that we've finally been able to get out from under 130 years of Democrat rule, the financial prospects are (similarly) dramatically better.

 

[timschochet]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

you say that like its a good thing. Isnt' it painfully obvious that going blue is a recipe for economic disaster. In fact, any democrat that can honestly compare california and texas and say california has a better government, better economy, and better freedom and opportunity for its citizens is either an abject liar or completely in denial of reality.

Caliofrnia has a much better economy than Texas. Texas has a GDP of 1.3 trillion, while California has a GDP of 1.9 trillion. Texas is growing but has a lonnnggg way to go before it reaches California in economic achievement. Given increasing trade with Asia, I doubt this will ever happen.

 

[bigbottom]

Princeton and Harvard Law grad? Yeah, whatever.

Clerked on the Fourth Circuit? Sure, he had good grades. Whatevs.

Clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist? No big woop. He hires based on ideology, not merit.

Solicitor General of Texas? Conservative version of affirmative action in action there.

Private practice for an international firm where he led the firm's U.S. Supreme Court and appellate litigation practice? Pshaw! His home office was in Houston for Pete's sake.

And he's done all this at a relatively young age? Only because he keeps failing upwards!

What about his posts at the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, not to mention teaching Supreme Court litigation for five years at UT Law? Not backpedaling! No qualifications whatsoever!

Attack him for being a fool, or for his crazy stances. But belittling his credentials and qualifications as if they are they are meaningless is not particularly effective.

[ . . .]

I have very little in common with Cruz. Why would this hit too close to home?

Because after I posted and you took issue with it, I remembered, vaguely, that you are a lawyer in Texas. (If this is wrong, my apologies.) So for all I know Cruz is an acquaintance, colleague, or personal friend, and therefore what I said was insensitive. Anyway, apology stands if needed.

I've summarized the counterpoints you've offered in this thread in the post above. If there's more to it than the shallow dismissiveness you've given it thus far, please share. I'm not a fan at all and would welcome more substantive criticism.

I have no issue with Princeton or Harvard Law. In fact, a lot of what he did at Princeton in terms of debating is really impressive, even though he doesn't seem to trumpet those achievements.

I think I mistyped or was misunderstood above about clerking for Rehnquist. Rereading, I think I was unclear. Clerking for any SCOTUS judge is impressive no matter what. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.

Clerking for Luttig. In my opinion, Luttig hired for ideology. I have some real-world basis for this conclusion, but it's hardly needed; anyone doing a short Internet search can learn all about the "Luttigators" and how a really, really high percentage of them went on to clerk for Scalia or Thomas. It was a pipeline that had very little to do with merit, but Luttig was an interesting character, culminating with his tantrum of resigning from the Fourth Circuit in 2005 (?) when he was passed over, twice, for what he apparently viewed as a SCOTUS slot that was rightfully his. Anyway, clerking for Luttig does not impress me, and many a member of the "Fourth Circuit community" before Bush 2 sort of messed up and the court lost its leading-light-conservative status are long on political backgrounds and a little light on legal heft, and it's been that way for years and years. In any event, there are thousands of people who have clerked at the circuit court level who are better qualified than Cruz for high federal office.

Bush administration federal agency jobs don't impress me. The guy worked in a couple of agencies. Okay. Actually, considering his achievements at Harvard and the clerkships, his subsequent jobs out of school are kind of underwhelming.

The Texas solicitor general job was an appointed position that was made to a curiously young individual with, at the time, not much real appellate litigation experience. It was an intriguing appointment, to say the least, when you consider the kind of person who typically makes arguments in front of, say, the SCOTUS on behalf of states. That's my opinion, but it's also shared by others who are a lot more connected to Texas and know a heck of a lot more about it. But this is very much something that impresses Republicans and is encouraged by the Federalist Society as part of a process of grooming candidates for higher office: Kelly Ayotte is another good example (although she was at least elected). Usually, these people are spurred to go on to become judges, but with a Democratic president, that's off the table, so we have Cruz in the Senate. (I'm not sure why Ayottte never seemingly pursued a federal judgeship; perhaps she did, or perhaps she liked the executive and legislative branches better.)

Almost everything else Cruz has done flowed from the TX solicitor general position. If he had been hired at Morgan Lewis right out of law school (plus the clerking), that would impress me to some extent, colored by my personal views on that particular firm. But he wasn't. He was hired by Morgan Lewis as a very young partner in connection with a brand-new Houston office and had a practice group effectively created around him because (I assume) the firm presumably wanted to capitalize on his work for the State of Texas. There's nothing wrong with that and it happens all the time, but "national appellate litgation practices" not located in Washington aren't exactly high-prestige, and I can't be too impressed with this achievement. Ditto the teaching at Texas. I mean, good for him, but I don't normally automatically connect "law professor" with "should be a Senator."

Cruz evidently didn't enjoy his job in private practice too much, or he saw a good opportunity to climb, which is what he's been all about and is why he has "done so much" at "such a young age." Hence the Senate campaign when KBH retired. Actually, even with the long tenure in the TX SG position, he's been a bit of a job-jumper. Like Rubio, he's an example of the Republican nonfamilial nepotism machine that tends to gravitate, these days, towards minorities. (Rand Paul is an example of true, familial nepotism, but not involving minorities.) He was identified early as someone around whom the party could build, and here he is in the Senate. The system worked. The problem is that he isn't really well-qualified to be a U.S. Senator because he is a creature of that Republican machine.

Anyway, just my opinion and I'm sure reasonable minds can differ. And listen, as much as I hate the ideology, maybe the guy will be a good senator, sort of in the way that Orrin Hatch used to be a good senator. But the McCarthyite garbage and his performance in the Hagel nomination aren't good signs at this very early stage.

Have you interacted with him in person? If so, what was your takeaway? And I'm not swooning over his résumé, I'm listing the details of his résumé. You're the one making judgements about them and characterizing them as meaningless.

Sorry about the snark on my end. I have to punt on directly answering the question about personal interactions because this is a public forum, but suffice it to say that I have some basis for my conclusion that he's not the brightest bulb. And ironically, I also have some basis to dispute the opinion expressed above that he's a #### in person.Finally, at those (not you) disputing Texas' demographic future as if this is some well-kept secret.

Thanks for the detailed post. Interesting stuff. And Cruz seems happy being the new tea party darling obstructionist. I don't have high hopes for him.

 

[Sand]

Caliofrnia has a much better economy than Texas. Texas has a GDP of 1.3 trillion, while California has a GDP of 1.9 trillion. Texas is growing but has a lonnnggg way to go before it reaches California in economic achievement. Given increasing trade with Asia, I doubt this will ever happen.

Better? Bigger, for sure - Cali has about 50% more people. On a tax burden adjusted wage basis, though, I'm not sure which one is "better".

 

[FootballDummy]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

Yep. That wasn't my reason for moving from Cali, but it certainly offset the slight pay cut I took to make the move. But couple low tax rates, low cost of living, and wide open spaces, and it can definitely be attractive to the demographic you reference.

We are thinking of moving there this year. She's a consultant and does healthcare software consulting. I work in IT and am looking to get into IT consulting. It seems like Houston and Dallas are two really good options. My director actually said that Dallas is one of the best places to live as a consultant because of the airport there. Any recommendations? Not really big on nightlife, but I would like to be able to do more than what is offered here which is basically bowling or going to the movies. Having a variety of quality ethnic/cultural food is a huge plus. I grew up in NJ and the options there compared to living in the south is just night and day.

You'd want to look at Houston then. Disclaimer: I could never live in Dallas.

 

[SacramentoBob]

until TX finally goes blue.

Will happen sooner than you think.

you say that like its a good thing.

Did I?

 

[SacramentoBob]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

Yep. That wasn't my reason for moving from Cali, but it certainly offset the slight pay cut I took to make the move. But couple low tax rates, low cost of living, and wide open spaces, and it can definitely be attractive to the demographic you reference.

We are thinking of moving there this year. She's a consultant and does healthcare software consulting. I work in IT and am looking to get into IT consulting. It seems like Houston and Dallas are two really good options. My director actually said that Dallas is one of the best places to live as a consultant because of the airport there. Any recommendations? Not really big on nightlife, but I would like to be able to do more than what is offered here which is basically bowling or going to the movies. Having a variety of quality ethnic/cultural food is a huge plus. I grew up in NJ and the options there compared to living in the south is just night and day.

There is nothing available.

I love you too.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

Yep. That wasn't my reason for moving from Cali, but it certainly offset the slight pay cut I took to make the move. But couple low tax rates, low cost of living, and wide open spaces, and it can definitely be attractive to the demographic you reference.

We are thinking of moving there this year. She's a consultant and does healthcare software consulting. I work in IT and am looking to get into IT consulting. It seems like Houston and Dallas are two really good options. My director actually said that Dallas is one of the best places to live as a consultant because of the airport there. Any recommendations? Not really big on nightlife, but I would like to be able to do more than what is offered here which is basically bowling or going to the movies. Having a variety of quality ethnic/cultural food is a huge plus. I grew up in NJ and the options there compared to living in the south is just night and day.

There is nothing available.

Blog it up?

 

[Joe T]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

Yep. That wasn't my reason for moving from Cali, but it certainly offset the slight pay cut I took to make the move. But couple low tax rates, low cost of living, and wide open spaces, and it can definitely be attractive to the demographic you reference.

We are thinking of moving there this year. She's a consultant and does healthcare software consulting. I work in IT and am looking to get into IT consulting. It seems like Houston and Dallas are two really good options. My director actually said that Dallas is one of the best places to live as a consultant because of the airport there. Any recommendations? Not really big on nightlife, but I would like to be able to do more than what is offered here which is basically bowling or going to the movies. Having a variety of quality ethnic/cultural food is a huge plus. I grew up in NJ and the options there compared to living in the south is just night and day.

There is nothing available.

Blog it up?

So you are moving there for spite??

 

[bigbottom]

Demographics are inexorably working against Texas Republicans. There's lots of articles about this.

And in addition to demographic shifts, you have net migration of residents from more liberal states like California. And with population growing in Texas, it's share of electoral votes is likely to increase, making it an even more important target than it already is.Edit to add link with migration map: http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/migration

Funny that high income liberal Californians and New Yorkers are moving to Texas for lower taxes.

Yep. That wasn't my reason for moving from Cali, but it certainly offset the slight pay cut I took to make the move. But couple low tax rates, low cost of living, and wide open spaces, and it can definitely be attractive to the demographic you reference.

We are thinking of moving there this year. She's a consultant and does healthcare software consulting. I work in IT and am looking to get into IT consulting. It seems like Houston and Dallas are two really good options. My director actually said that Dallas is one of the best places to live as a consultant because of the airport there. Any recommendations? Not really big on nightlife, but I would like to be able to do more than what is offered here which is basically bowling or going to the movies. Having a variety of quality ethnic/cultural food is a huge plus. I grew up in NJ and the options there compared to living in the south is just night and day.

Texans love food, and Houston is one of the most diverse cities in the country. The combination makes for an amazing selection of quality food options. Hell, Houston's food was one of the primary reasons it made at least one list of the top cities to visit in 2013 worldwide.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/01/10/travel/2013-places-to-go.html