All Forums | Politics

Mattbrot principle__ An egregious case at the GOP convention

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2154
Posts: 51
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #1
A little background for those not familiar. I am a well documented non-partisan independent. IMO my biggest contribution to this forum is my ability to call out overt examples of hypocrisy coming from both sides of the political spectrum. A most non-partisan approach. 

Another poster (not myself) coined the term "mattbrot principle" to describe the cases of overt hypocrisy.

This comes from the GOP convention. Trump is their elected nominee. He is like none we have ever seen. He spoke his mind regardless of who he was offending, was not politically correct to anybody even the GOP, acted like a school yard bully, called other candidates names, made fun of their looks, even wives and other family members were fair game. My point is this is his style. Many in the GOP love it. They love that he is not politically correct, is not a career politician, and can't be told what to say / speaks his mind.

However, when Cruz spoke last night he did not endorse Trump. He stuck to his beliefs and spoke his mind despite the expectation and I can only assume pressure to endorse Trump. But he could not do it and stuck to his guns and spoke his mind.

But... ironically last night and today he has been given a very hard time. Has been harshly criticized and basically deemed a "traitor".

What for. He spoke his mind. How is that different than what Trump has done all along??? 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #2
And there you have it folks. Possibly the most egregious case of fundamental hypocrisy that we have seen lately. 

An example most deserving the category of "mattbrot principle".

This non-partisan independent is embarrassed for the GOP that this has happened.

How about any of you???
 
Covers Rehab
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 33996
Posted: #3
Lyin Ted ..Oh how he lies...

 A mans word is his bond...

Here's the text of the pledge which was signed by Ted Cruz and all of the Republican candidates:

I (name) affirm that if I do not win the 2016 Republican nomination for president of the United States I will endorse the 2016 Republican presidential nominee regardless of who it is. I further pledge that I will not seek to run as an independent or write-in candidate nor will I seek or accept the nomination for president of any other party.


In March of this year, Cruz reaffirmed that pledge. 

"My answer is the same," Political reported Cruz told reporters when asked if he would support Trump. "I committed at the outset, I will support the Republican nominee, whoever it is."


He holds the bible high; He puts it down, and then he lies.

Rafael Edward Cruz - is a traitor to the Republican party........he is a traitor to Canadian ........he is now the Edward Snowden of the party...


 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2010
Posts: 35347
Posted: #4
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:

Lyin Ted ..Oh how he lies...

 A mans word is his bond...

Here's the text of the pledge which was signed by Ted Cruz and all of the Republican candidates:

I (name) affirm that if I do not win the 2016 Republican nomination for president of the United States I will endorse the 2016 Republican presidential nominee regardless of who it is. I further pledge that I will not seek to run as an independent or write-in candidate nor will I seek or accept the nomination for president of any other party.


In March of this year, Cruz reaffirmed that pledge. 

"My answer is the same," Political reported Cruz told reporters when asked if he would support Trump. "I committed at the outset, I will support the Republican nominee, whoever it is."


He holds the bible high; He puts it down, and then he lies.

Rafael Edward Cruz - is a traitor to the Republican party........he is a traitor to Canadian ........he is now the Edward Snowden of the party...



And if he was the nominee you'd love him.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #5
Slim -- that is a bit of a catch here I agree. But IMO the pledge was made prior to all of the child games that Trump did. Prior to all of the name calling, crazy political ideas, and prior to personally attacking Cruz's wife and dad.

At that point all bets are off. Cruz was privy to over a years worth of information that allowed him to reconsider his pledge. That is understandable if he really came to the conclusion that he could not support Trump.

If you promised me that I could use your house free of charge next summer for a week and then I in turn spend the next year criticizing you in every childish way possible and attacked your family what would you do? I would fully expect you to take back your promise. Maybe not the best example but the fundamental point is there.

In fact people are calling Cruz a coward etc. But I would argue that he is more admirable and has more integrity than the others. Cause he was not afraid to speak his mind and go against the status quo for something he did not believe in. 


 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #6
And by the way I dislike Cruz more than Trump. I think he would be a far more scary nominee than Trump. 

So this is not pro-Cruz topic. Rather it is an anti-hypocrisy post.
 
Covers Rehab
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 33996
Posted: #7
If you pledged and affirmed to me that I could use your house free of charge next summer for a week and you took back your promise for any reason not stated when you made the pledge ..I would sue you.

As far as the Cruz pledge... politicians need to be held accountable for for broken promises,,that's part of the problem were are having to day in American politics..too may lies too many unfulfilled promises by politicians just to get your support..

"I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you." ~Friedrich Nietzsche

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #8
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:

If you pledged and affirmed to me that I could use your house free of charge next summer for a week and you took back your promise for any reason not stated when you made the pledge ..I would sue you.

As far as the Cruz pledge... politicians need to be held accountable for for broken promises,,that's part of the problem were are having to day in American politics..too may lies too many unfulfilled promises by politicians just to get your support..

"I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you." ~Friedrich Nietzsche


a signed or verbal pledge does not mean that anyone involved can act any which way possible and not have the potential for backlash. 
It happens all the time. People in all kinds of jobs are fired despite having a contract. Having a contract does not relieve you from being a decent person. And hey maybe Cruz truthfully felt after all of the info over the past year came out that he could no longer support Trump.

Good for him for sticking to his morals. The same thing that many people support Trump for.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 1399
Posted: #9
Sticking up for his morals.   Give me an fin break.   Except for Trump, Cruz is the biggest narcisstic sleaze bucket on the planet.   He made a self centered judgment that Trump is going to lose or be there for 8.  Thus, his only chance of being elected in 2020 was sabotaging Trump and be damned with every1 else.   Kind of backfired Teddy.  Never been a team player.  If he was really concerned about his morals then he should have stayed home and issued some type of statement
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #10
Quote Originally Posted by shiek:

Sticking up for his morals.   Give me an fin break.   Except for Trump, Cruz is the biggest narcisstic sleaze bucket on the planet.   He made a self centered judgment that Trump is going to lose or be there for 8.  Thus, his only chance of being elected in 2020 was sabotaging Trump and be damned with every1 else.   Kind of backfired Teddy.  Never been a team player.  If he was really concerned about his morals then he should have stayed home and issued some type of statement

i do not necessarily disagree about staying home. But he did not. And he was invited and choose to accept. And choose to not give into the pressure. In short he did the very thing that Trump is above everything else is Praised for. 


 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #11
he is a sleaze ball. no doubt. I agree with that. 

I am just pointing out that he did the very thing that Trump has done all along. And that Trump has been praised for.

Can't have it both ways. Either we want people to speak their minds and be politically incorrect or we don't. Can't have it both ways.

that is the sole point of this thread. 

It is not about how great or nor that Cruz is. It is about him following the political lead that has been laid out and yet being criticized for that. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 1399
Posted: #12
Except the criticism of Cruz had nothing to do w being "politically incorrect" and Cruzs actions had nothing to do w being politically incorrect.  It had to do w him being a narcisstic fool, which he demonstrated once again last night.  In fact I will plagiarize from a ghost from covers past who said cruz is the guy who tackles the make a wish cancer victim running for a TD on the 1 yard line.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 6840
Posted: #13
Quote Originally Posted by shiek:

Except the criticism of Cruz had nothing to do w being "politically incorrect" and Cruzs actions had nothing to do w being politically incorrect.  It had to do w him being a narcisstic fool, which he demonstrated once again last night.  In fact I will plagiarize from a ghost from covers past who said cruz is the guy who tackles the make a wish cancer victim running for a TD on the 1 yard line.

once again -- he took a page out of trump's book!!!

that is the point


 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2016
Posts: 610
Posted: #14
This was a tough convention for the Gop. They did their best considering that no one relevant spoke. The plagiarism was an unfortunate unforced error in addition to allowing Ted Cruz one last parting shot. The highlight tonight was Ivanka. Donald was ineffective......just louder than usual. Let's see if he gets the obligatory bump.
 
Covers Rehab
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 33996
Posted: #15
Quote Originally Posted by mattbrot:


I am just pointing out that he did the very thing that Trump has done all along. And that Trump has been praised for.


Trump did not break his pledge to support the parties nominee.. Cruz did....and since Cruz hasn't been speaking his mind along .. so if what he was doing at the convention was speaking his mind ..it come across as out of character...more like two faced.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2002
Posts: 22961
Posted: #16
Quote Originally Posted by Inyourlife16:

This was a tough convention for the Gop. They did their best considering that no one relevant spoke. The plagiarism was an unfortunate unforced error in addition to allowing Ted Cruz one last parting shot. The highlight tonight was Ivanka. Donald was ineffective......just louder than usual. Let's see if he gets the obligatory bump.

I completely disagree with what you wrote.

Why was it a tough convention for the GOP?
I know the liberal media tried hard to paint it that way, each and every day. I thought the attempt failed miserably, but maybe I was wrong based upon some comments I've read from libs such as yourself.

"No one relevant spoke" 
I'm sure you can't wait for the Dems to roll out Barbara Streisand, as if she is "relevant". 
I would suggest that Gingrich is relevant, and now that they have spoken, Donald Jr and Ivanka are both relevant. I could go on, but relevancy is in the mind of each individual.

MSNBC, and other liberal outlets, had a field day reporting how Cruz torpedoed Trumps chances, yada, yada, yada.
Not once did I hear/read them say that Trump was well aware of what Cruz was going to say BEFORE he said it, and he let him take the mic anyway. In Trumps own words he said it was "no big deal", and he was right, unless of course you listened to the liberal media. Trump played Cruz for a fool, knowing he would get booed off the stage, and then Trump triumphantly walked into the arena as Cruz was wrapping up, and the reactions to both men told the painfully obvious story. Obvious to anyone who does not lap up what the liberal media tells them to think.

"Donald was ineffective"???
Wow. Even some of the liberal media painted his speech in a positive light.
I can't argue with your perception, as it is yours.
Needless to say, mine differs.

My numerous references of the 'liberal media' are made in contrast to the constant references from far too many here about "Faux News"
It seems people think Fox News is biased, but those same people are blind to the fact that most other media outlets are equally biased, just from the opposite perspective.

For the record, I'm not sure that I could vote for anyone as bombastic and narcissistic as Trump is. On the other hand, I know for a fact that I could not vote for the most dishonest, unlikeable, annoying crook in the history of politics. Thus, for me it is Trump (by default) or nothing 

bigreds daddy
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #17
long after human civilization is gone, the mattbrot principle will live on, and be a guiding force for new civilizations to come. 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #18
i'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but my favorite part of this ted cruz thing is that what he actually said, from what i heard, is to vote your conscience (Def.: the inner sense of what is right or wrong in one's conduct or motives, impelling one toward right action.) 

and everyone interprets that to mean don't vote for trump.  
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2002
Posts: 22961
Posted: #19
CD,

Quick question ...
If you will, disregard for a second who she is running against and answer this ... is a vote for HRC born from a place of good conscience? 
bigreds daddy
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #20
i suppose the quick and simple answer is: no, these people, as a general rule, are the worst. 

however, and i don't want to get into a debate over specific issues, but if you vote based on certain issues, an argument can be made that you could vote for hillary in good conscience, and even trump if he ever gets around to articulating some specific, rational ideas and plans, because all of these candidates have major flaws but also some positives as well. 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2002
Posts: 22961
Posted: #21
Personally, I can not vote for either in good conscience. 
My sole reasoning for 'possibly' backing Trump is simply that he is not a politician, and as such, he is not part of the totally flawed system of government which is trying hard to drag down this great country.

IMO, HRC, on the other hand, is the epitome of the political sh!t-show that tarnishes the countries image for Americans, as well as foreigners  
bigreds daddy
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #22
there's always this guy 


https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/21/politics/gary-johnson-ted-cruz/
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2002
Posts: 22961
Posted: #23
This is a quote from Gary Johnson when describing republicans approaching him with their approval ...
"Like 1,000 people. Amazing. And not one single jab. You'd think I'd get a poke. At least one poke"

Sometimes jokes just write themselves 

Regarding any response to my comment, please spare me the PC b+llsh!t.
IMO, It's ok to make jokes about others, as long as there is no intent to harm 
bigreds daddy
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #24
Quote Originally Posted by mattbrot:

A little background for those not familiar. I am a well documented non-partisan independent. IMO my biggest contribution to this forum is my ability to call out overt examples of hypocrisy coming from both sides of the political spectrum. A most non-partisan approach. 

Another poster (not myself) coined the term "mattbrot principle" to describe the cases of overt hypocrisy.

 

To me, the post has a foundation built in sand. A Trump tower is definitely built on a firm foundation of pilings driven deep into the ground until they are firmly affixed to bedrock.

Perhaps I am the worlds biggest idiot or the worst math student ever, but the math for mattbrot doesn't add up. I need some explanation to help shore up the foundation.

At present there are 6531 posts associated with the OP. 
The OP rarely posts more than half a dozen times in most threads but there may be a handful of exceptions.

Also, one could probably count the number of times the OP has been critical of the other side....on one hand....and have a finger or two left to scratch ones scalp...

Conservative math would deduce that you still have over 3000+ posts critical of the left or left leaning principles to officially qualify for the NPI ribbon.

To me is the equivalent of Trevor Story calling himself 'Mr. 3000'

Then there's the positive aspect to think of. I always regret when I do not end on a positive note. ( I need to get better at that. Work in progress.)

At least you don't have as far to go as the Da Rel...the other prominent self titled NPI. He's got over 12,000 posts to go.
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 3389
Posted: #25
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:

i suppose the quick and simple answer is: no, these people, as a general rule, are the worst. 

however, and i don't want to get into a debate over specific issues, but if you vote based on certain issues, an argument can be made that you could vote for hillary in good conscience, and even trump if he ever gets around to articulating some specific, rational ideas and plans, because all of these candidates have major flaws but also some positives as well. 
translation: 'derrrp my quick answer is no and my other dumb answer is yes somehow derrrp'
All Forums | Politics
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2025 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.