Talk Show Host Calls On Cruz To Withdraw And Back Rubio...REALLY?

I haven’t fully made my case for Ted Cruz yet as a third part of a series on the primary contest. I will, but one discussed the empty challenges of Trump supporters re: conservatism, and this is a response to a radio host about Trump’s two leading challengers, Cruz and Rubio:

I've been acquainted with your work for almost 30 years and have listened to your program for about 15. I'm a Christian and agree with you probably over 95% on the breadth of matters. But the implications where we disagree are pretty deep, mostly due to our different theological perspectives. But though we are pretty philosophically square, occasionally I disagree with your practical political judgments. And today I thought you were a little out ahead of your skis.

It's true I am a Cruz supporter and unequivocally so, and I know you like Cruz. But Ted Cruz should withdraw and back Rubio? Really? Where do I begin? I have said something a LITTLE similar in recent days, and as you say about Trump supporters, I understand what inspires that thinking, but I think you've been deceived by the clamor.

1) Cruz and Rubio now have the same number of delegates, Rubio with a 3rd, 5th, 2nd (by a hair) and another 2nd (also close to 3rd. Cruz has a 1st, a 3rd, and those close two 3rds to Rubio. The reason I say you are hasty is because I wait to hear what you will say after Tuesday when Cruz almost surely will collect more delegates than Rubio; probably a lot.

2) You believe that Rubio is a more likely winner. Don't I believe the chatter around the media, including FOX?l Definitely not. I'm not making character aspersions, but most of these people don't think too thoroughly. And even the ones who do, are often captive to some conventional assumptions that are unsound.

Obviously you know of Cruz' background. Honors graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law. National debate champion. Clerk for SC Justice Rehnquist. Solicitor General of Texas litigating 9 times before the Supreme Court, winning 5. Alan Dershowirtz said though he disagreed with Cruz, he was one of his most brilliant and consistent students, even sometimes persuading Dershowitz himself on LEGAL arguments.

Now with Perry, Walker and Jindal out and Carson lagging, Rubio had been my 2nd choice before the high-pitched and dishonest flailing about a list of Cruz' supposed lies. I'm a little surprised that you haven't had much to say on that. Rubio who knows and has worked with Cruz and also knows what actually happened, must know as we Texans do that it was slanderous. When has Cruz slandered anyone's character except to deny the truth of their accusations?

I don't hold Rubio's repetition of a point he wanted to emphasize against him, when Christie hounded him, just like I didn't regard Perry's drawing a blank on short notice in 2012 as disqualifying. But is it really a question who will respond most ably to Hillary and who might be briefly caught with their pants down or stammering in an exchange? Seems a no-brainer to me.

3) I'll agree with one thing: Rubio is simply prima facie more appealing, which means nothing to me and I assume to you. But of course it means something to a lot of people. He's physically attractive and more personally engaging, whereas Cruz is more resolute and didactic; maybe good in court if not so much interpersonally. He's much smarter and more learned even than Reagan. But hasn't Reagan's disarming easy-goingness and affability. He needs to work on that and as the nominee would surely get coaching.

4) Lastly, Cruz is much more constitutionally learned and committed. I hate overused and under-defined words, but "establishment" Republicans most fear great conflict with the media, whether owing to comfort with or fear for their positions. That's why they capitulate.

Knowing what kind of storm they can raise, it will be hurricane force when a finger is lifted against Obama's legacy or when attempting to move the nation in a constitutional direction, whether by regulatory relief and legislative action or making judicial nominees; especially 3 or 4 upcoming Supreme Court ones. Republican knees will begin to shake and buckle. The leadership will put pressure on the president. Again, is it really a question which would waiver and which would fight for The Constitution? The republic's in trouble, and we are where we are because Republicans have not had the faith to revere the truth like Democrats have pounded and driven falsehood.

Here is what I have thought: Together, Cruz and Rubio should announce that whichever of them has least delegates on and after Super Tuesday, should withdraw and unite conservatives in supporting the other. I admit: I'm fairly confident that will be Cruz, but I'll support either.