Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

No, really, nobody likes Ted Cruz

Womp, womp.

Not Ted Cruz

President Donald Trump’s budget chief said Saturday that Republican U.S. Sen Ted Cruz could lose his seat in the November elections, suggesting that he is not likable enough, The New York Times reported.

According to the Times report, Mick Mulvaney, the leader of the Office of Management and Budget and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said at a closed-door meeting with Republican donors in New York City that he did not believe in the existence of a “blue wave” of Democrats overtaking many Republican-held seats but that Cruz may be in trouble.

“There’s a very real possibility we will win a race for Senate in Florida and lose a race in Texas for Senate, O.K.?” Mulvaney said, according to an audio recording of the meeting obtained by the Times. “I don’t think it’s likely, but it’s a possibility. How likable is a candidate? That still counts.”


To further his point on a candidate’s likability, Mulvaney mentioned last year’s special election for Senate in Alabama, when Republican Roy Moore, a former judge accused of sexual misconduct with teenage girls, lost to his Democratic opponent.

I mean, Mick Mulvaney is himself about as likable as a case of athlete’s foot, so this is really saying something. I’m not sure what I love more, that people feel so free to insult Ted Cruz, or that people feel so free to record such insults and leak them to reporters so the rest of us can enjoy it as well. Or maybe Mulvaney just internalized the lesson that Donald Trump taught us all, that the way to earn Ted Cruz’s affection and loyalty is to treat him like garbage. Has Mulvaney tweeted about Mrs. Cruz being ugly yet? That’s got to be next.

Related Posts:


  1. C.I. says:

    I’m happy with his job performance in Washington and will vote for him in November.

  2. Robbie Westmoreland says:

    He is better than Cats. I want to vote for him again and again.

  3. Andrew Lynch says:

    Policy over personality. Cruz is strong on tax and regulation cuts. I will take that over Beto everytime.

  4. Robert says:

    I like him and am pleased with Cruz.

  5. Manny Barrera says:

    Cruz paid trolls showed up, above.

  6. Bill Daniels says:

    I support Cruz, because Cruz will use eminent domain only for national security projects, like a border wall, whereas O’Roarke wanted to use eminent domain to make wealthy investors like his father-in-law more wealthy, at the expense of folks in the barrio.

  7. Jules says:

    Is that really Cruz’s policy or just something you made up? I have not heard Cruz come out against the proposed Dallas – Houston high speed rail, a private project that almost assuredly will require eminent domain.

  8. Bill Daniels says:

    OK, that WAS just something I threw out there. I don’t know Cruz’ position on eminent domain.

    That doesn’t detract from the fact that “Beto” was perfectly willing and able to screw over la raza when it suited his purposes. Man of the people, indeed. Beto’s erstwhile project was more along the lines of Kelo v. New London, tossing people out of their houses for private development, not a train, an airport, military base, hospital, or other public interest.

    The link I quoted is very Dem friendly. They had real problems with Beto back then.

  9. Manny Barrera says:

    Bill you will believe anything that lying Ted or the pathological liar Trump say. Need to ween yourself out of that mentality.

    But what about eminent domain? A former council member says the Cruz ad is history out of context.

    “It really laid the groundwork for all of the investment you’ve seen in downtown El Paso since then,” said Susie Byrd about the idea. She’s a former city council member who served with O’Rourke.

    She says in 2006, he supported the option of taking private land if needed to get rid of unreliable landlords. But after community pushback, she says O’Rourke voted with the rest of council to ban eminent domain in the first year of the final proposal.

    “We took that off the table when we finally adopted,” she said. “It was based on a lot of feedback from the community. We realized it was a huge distraction.”

    Source –

    Bill don’t pretend you care about La Raza, as you stated not too long ago, Manny’s people.

  10. Flypusher says:

    Bill is in classic IOKIYAR hypocrite mode. Trump has a very sketchy record with eminent domain, but funny that never came up.

  11. Jules says:

    If the hsr ever gets built, my guess is it will look a lot like A Trump casino deal – bankruptcy for the project yet certain investors make out like bandits.

  12. Jules says:

    If the hsr ever gets built, my guess is it will look a lot like A Trump casino deal – bankruptcy for the project yet certain investors make out like bandits.

  13. Bill Daniels says:

    Guys, let’s all just have a gut check moment here. We are ALL correct here. You have valid “whataboutism” criticisms, so let’s be honest. It all boils down to, if it’s OUR guy, we are willing to overlook just about anything, but if it’s THEIR guy, we will use anything we have to crucify their guy.

    In the end, it boils down to policy differences. If you like what the President is doing, you vote for the guy who will support that agenda, and if you don’t like what the president is doing, you vote for the guy opposing the President. What’s new and different these days is, there are people that passionately hate the President, even though his actual policies are good for them personally. People whose 401K’s exploded, people who got jobs, or got better jobs, people who are bringing home more in their paycheck….all can thank the President’s policies, even as they curse the President. I suspect that represents most of the folks here. You are personally benefiting from the Trump presidency, even as you work to neuter or end it.

  14. Flypusher says:

    Anyone who isn’t a political n00b knows that pretty much everyone who’s been in politics long enough is going to have a bone or two in the closet. But let’s keep it real- your boy Donny2Scoops has several large cemeteries worth. This isn’t simple BSAB whatabboutism, this is microscopic mote vs skyscraper beam. Trump is the dirtiest, most corrupt, most dishonest politician in my lifetime, and probably in the history of the republic. Cruz wants to cuddle up to that, then there’s plenty of tar on the brush for him.

    As for the economic stuff, it’s like slamming a few cans of 4Loko. There’s a short term rush, but the high wears off. If the economy is so great, then why can’t federal employees get their cost of living raises? Ignoring the big hole blown in the deficit is going to come back to bite. So is ignoring climate change. So is treating loyal allies badly.

    Then we have the moral issue. Trump could promise to refund every penny I’ve ever paid in taxes, and it wouldn’t be worth looking away from all the bigotry and hate he stirs up. Economic opportunity is necessary, but not sufficient for a secure life in America. You also have to have assurance that your civil rights will be respected. Ask those innocent Hispsnicker Americans who are getting their passports yanked how secure they feel about their civil rights. If anyone’s civil rights are in danger, everyone’s civil rights are potentially in danger, and no tax cut can remedy that.

  15. Flypusher says:

    Bloody autocorrect-wth is “Hispsnicker”? Should be Hispanic.

  16. Jules says:

    If you didn’t want your child to have his passport revoked, you shouldn’t’ve used a midwife near the border. Seems pretty easy to me.

  17. Flypusher says:

    Right, because they should have been prescient and known that an asshole bigot would be in the White House someday and use any excuse to screw over Hispanics. And it’s also their fault for choosing a midwife over a hospital because likely that’s all they could afford.

    I haven’t heard of definitive proof of anyone who lost a passport having a fraudulent birth certificate, just suspicion. What happened to the accuser having to prove their case? What happened to the principle of “better to let 10 guilty people go free rather than wrongly punish one innocent person”? (Rhetorical question, I know that’s all null and void in Trumpland). Don’t forget the people in question are innocent victims, unless you want to argue that newborn babies can conspire to commit fraud (and that probably will go into the next set of Trumpkin talking points).

  18. Bill Daniels says:

    Jules and Fly,

    I actually agree with both of you on this point. I know fraud occurred, Mexican babies were carried into the US using the birth certificate of another child, but you are both correct, if it can’t be proved without a shadow of a doubt that one of those grown up kids was actually smuggled in illegally, then they shouldn’t be facing the loss of a passport. Team Trump has made a mistake there, unless there’s more to the story we don’t know about. The burden of proof is on the government, not the person being questioned about their citizenship.

  19. Flypusher says:

    No Bill, team Trump didn’t make a mistake. A mistake is something unintentional. This is a DELIBERATE action.