Assuming that people like the Shucky Ducky guy and Santorum aren't running.

Now, if you said Huckabee, Christie, or Jebbie had such a plan, I'd be a lot more concerned because they COULD get elected.

Cruz is a clown -- always will be, and if that clown turns the GOP primary season into another circus, so much the better. Ask Romney how that worked out for him.

Hitler was thought of as a clown too.

Hitler rose with bigots and haters. That much is in common with Cruz. But Hitler was a phenomenon that swept through society relatively suddenly. I realize that "suddenly" was a decade or more, but today's information cycles are compressed tenfold from Hitler's times. Basically everybody is onto Cruz. A small minority of the public supports him, and more importantly, none of the powerful parties will tolerate him. Neither the Republican nor Democratic establishment -- and the billionaires and giant corporations they represent -- will have Cruz.

The Republican elite had already decided they needed to shut down the teabaggers, and that was before Cantor's loss. They will redouble their efforts now.

Teabaggers can win in Gerrymandered districts in states with the greatest ignorance and hatred. They will never win anything nationally. The GOP power structure knows this and they will undermine Cruz.

And that will take a huge amount of their attention going forward, which is a good reason for us to hope for Cruz to stay on the scene as long as possible.

Unless the GOP wants to commit political suicide, there's no way in hell he'll ever be nominated.

Just sayin'

He knew how to play to a crowd and work the media.

Cruz whips up his own crowds and scares the hell out of everyone else.

If our country has changed to the point where we will fall for Cruz's routine, I'm applying for asylum here in Germany.

1) Reagan did it in the 70s and 80s, before Internet, before Youtube, before 24-hour cable news. Internet and free media would have CRUCIFIED him.

2) Reagan was an actor and a hell of a lot better politician than Ted Cruz. Reagan knew how to make friends; Cruz only knows how to antagonize people. That may please the Tea Party, but for the other 90% of the country it isn't gonna work.

Underestimating Cruz is the best way to give him the space and time he needs to polish his act and refine his patter. Reagan was a lousy B grade actor and in the beginning he was a lousy politician. I remember plenty of Democrats laughing at the idea of Ronnie running for office. Next thing we knew he was Governor Reagan and we all know what happened after that.

Personally - I don't have much more trust in "new media" than I do the old M$M - much of what could have been great citizen journalism has been corrupted and co-opted by M O N E Y and savvy AstroTurf operations.

Finally - I hope you are right and I am wrong but I'd rather end this toads presidential aspirations sooner rather than later.

You can't tell me the Internet wouldn't have made full use of that.

Let's face it, the Internet is the Wild West of unsubstantiated rumors. It is the home of truth tellers, liars, and everything in between. Just take a look at all the confusion, claims, and counter claims made after the Boston Bombings and 911. Better yet see how much good the internet did stopping us from going into Iraq with our " Shock and Awe" campaign. Not very much.

Now maybe there could have been enough evidence to catapult any forum discussions, tweets, youtube videos, and Facebook posts into some sort of coherent factual report about his disability but it's equally likely his deep pocket supporters could have used the internet to generate the "fog of war" necessary to create confusion and doubt.

Again, respectfully - I guess its ok to hypothesize about how the internet could have changed the past. Personally, I think our time would be better spent taking these monsters down before they get rolling.

Just as people would have paid attention to the Nixon shenanigans in 1968 or JFK hiding his health issues in 1960 if the Internet had been around, the Alzheimer's rumors would have either assured Reagan never won--or at least assured he never got a second term.

And that's what's great about the Internet. No one news company owns it, and people tend to get their news from online instead of print and TV nowadays.

Which "Internet" are you referring to? Amazon.com? Aryan Radio? the Drudge Report? DU? The Blaze? MSNBC? You are right - what's great about the internet is no one owns it - well, except for the government that is... What's wrong with the internet is it is the modern equivalent of the tower of babble. The danger in the internet is trying to figure out who the truth tellers are, who is spinning, and who is outright lying.

If, as you say, people are getting their news there, we had better hope to god they can figure out who to listen to. Personally, I have very little faith that the average citizen has the necessary skills to decide which of the millions of babbling voices is the truth teller. Hell - most people don't understand the difference between "editorial" and "news" content. It's all just "news to them."

Old media has it's problems but it also has its advantages - 4th Estate Tradition and Editors. Competing news sources have a tradition of reporting only verifiable facts. There is also lots of competition to both get the story first and importantly - get the story right. Those are very good goals to shoot for.

Finally, I doubt I will convince you take off your rose colored glasses and see the very real hurdles the "Internet" faces when it comes to delivering facts and I know you won't convince me that the "Internet" will suddenly solve the worlds ills. So - while it has been fun, I have a community garden to help weed so that's it for me.

Keep fighting the good fight and take care!

is a postcard with its picture.