Blogs Feb 1, 2016 at 11:22 am

Ted Cruz Mailer Accidentally Makes Convincing Case for Voting Against Ted Cruz

Matt Baume
Back to article

Comments

1
Make it stop. Please make it stop.
Gurldoggie on February 1, 2016 at 11:34 AM Report this
2
The odds for Trump seem pretty low. Though it's good to hear that Wall Street's buddy Hillary "Let's Start a War" Clinton pull out a victory. I've pretty much given up on Bernie at this point and will plug my nose and vote for the woman who has no problems doing what the wealthy want. I mean she's wealthy so it makes sense she'll fuck the rest of us.
Cato the Younger Younger on February 1, 2016 at 11:34 AM Report this
3
The New York Times Endorses Hillary Clinton with a Banner Ad for Citigroup

Today’s digital edition of The New York Times captures the essence of the cancer eating away at our democracy: a leading newspaper is endorsing a deeply tarnished candidate for the highest office in America while a major Wall Street bank that has played a key role in her conflicted candidacy runs a banner ad as if to salute the endorsement. The slogan on Citigroup’s ad, “cash back once just isn’t enough,” perfectly epitomizes the frequency with which the Clintons have gone to the Citigroup well.
Original Andrew on February 1, 2016 at 11:36 AM Report this
4
This is fabulous.
Chandira on February 1, 2016 at 11:46 AM Report this
5
Reactance: what happens when most people read The Stranger.
seatownr on February 1, 2016 at 11:52 AM Report this
6
@3, who/what are you quoting?
sarah91 on February 1, 2016 at 11:54 AM Report this
8
@6, Pam and Russ Martens. Click the headline link as the entire article and site are heavily researched and well-worth reading.
Original Andrew on February 1, 2016 at 12:17 PM Report this
9
Maybe Cruz could also offer to refinance your mortgage. Act now! Operators are standing by.

Srsly, he should write a book on how someone with repulsive social skills and zero self-awareness became a sleazy US Senatard and preznidential candidate.
Original Andrew on February 1, 2016 at 12:21 PM Report this
10
@3: It's a stupid article. Everyone knows that web ads are generally programmatically placed and are on a whole different track than authored content. To derive meanings from such juxtapositions is preposterous. Same with a mortuary ad next to an article on a mass shooting.
raindrop on February 1, 2016 at 12:24 PM Report this
11
@ 7, uh that's the exact opposite if what happened. The oil companies and their various cronies ordered the war to steal Iraq's oil. Perhaps you didn't know that Dick Cheney worked for Halliburton?? It's the entire reason the war was cooked up for phony reasons in the first place.

And--surprise--they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.
Original Andrew on February 1, 2016 at 12:28 PM Report this
12
@2: I don't think that's really her nickname.
Max Solomon on February 1, 2016 at 12:28 PM Report this
13
Rachel from Cardholder Services should be Cruz's VP pick.
raindrop on February 1, 2016 at 12:29 PM Report this
14
@10 Which of the facts in this article--which you obviously didn't read--is stupid exactly?
Original Andrew on February 1, 2016 at 12:31 PM Report this
15
@11: However, the oil was not stolen after the invasion.
raindrop on February 1, 2016 at 12:32 PM Report this
16
@14: Okay, just the headline and first sentence are stupid in inferring that the NYT set the ad to be adjacent to the article.
raindrop on February 1, 2016 at 12:37 PM Report this
17
@ 15, OK they helped cause the deaths of a million people and then extracted and exported their most valuable natural resource at far-below market value compensation. Perhaps that is specific enough to satisfy your moral void.
Original Andrew on February 1, 2016 at 12:47 PM Report this
19
@17: I'm not debating the reasoning or morality of the Iraq war, I'm simply performing everyone's civic duty to chip away at conspiracy theories.
raindrop on February 1, 2016 at 1:06 PM Report this
21
@ 18, I did, and it's just one reporter's opinion that's not backed up by facts or supported by the evidence. He even admits that Exxon gleefully made out like bandits after the war, so I don't see your point.
Original Andrew on February 1, 2016 at 1:21 PM Report this
22
Just saw a copy of the mailer on Mother Jones (thanks for the link). What on earth made anyone think this was a good idea?
Clayton on February 1, 2016 at 2:28 PM Report this
23
@11:

Yeah, with oil now down around $32 a barrel and the entire Middle East rapidly devolving into an internecine hell-hole, I imagine if anyone is left in the Exxon/Shell/Chevron/Conoco boardrooms from the GW-II era they're probably wishing they'd invested their corporate campaign dollars elsewhere.
COMTE on February 1, 2016 at 3:49 PM Report this

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview
Posted by (your name here)

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.

Editors' Picks

We Are the 20%
The 15 Best Restaurants in the Seattle Area 2023
My Whole Life I've Been Asked If I'm a Girl or a Boy
Church or Cult?
Tish Gallow Keeps Black Music Alive in Columbia City
Pride Wall Supporters Outnumber Homophobes and Transphobes at Duvall Public Meeting
The Stranger
is a proud member of the media network
Masthead Ad Info & Rates Jobs at The Stranger Contact Privacy Policy Terms of Use Takedown Policy Find The Stranger Near You
Support The Stranger
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134