Jump to content

Talk:Ted Cruz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by OutPutter (talk | contribs) at 08:02, 17 October 2015 (→Relationships with fellow Republicans: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Great grand father? not notable and not needed

I removed the content about Cruz grand father and great grand father. Not notable and not needed. - Cwobeel (talk) 18:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the process of doing the same (getting an edit conflict warning). That much detail is deeply in the territory of undue weight. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:00, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The extra content on his father is not necessary, either. The article is about Cruz, not his father. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Internet regulation section seems to contradict itself

The internet regulation section of the article reads as follows:

Cruz opposes net neutrality arguing that the Internet economy has flourished in the United States simply because it has remained largely free from government regulation. He believes regulating the Internet will stifle online innovation and create monopolies. He has expressed support for stripping the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of its power under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and opposes reclassifying internet service providers as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934.

Based on what Cruz is claimed to "argue", it would seem that he is in favor of net neutrality. Am I missing something? 73.136.92.159 (talk) 08:59, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're not alone in seeing that. The problem is a fundamental misunderstanding of what net neutrality is by a number of politicians, Ted Cruz among them. Somehow they believe that the FCC mandating net neutrality is tantamount to them doing the exact opposite. It makes absolutely no sense, but his constituents loved it. As it is, the text is confusing because his position makes absolutely no sense and is contradictory. Ayzmo (talk) 13:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RFC about whether presidential candidacy belongs in lead paragraph

Talk:Rick_Perry#RFC_about_whether_his_presidential_candidacy_should_be_mentioned_in_the_lead_paragraphAnythingyouwant (talk) 15:40, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Immigration Stance

Why isn't his immigration position on the page anywhere?

2602:306:3B27:2670:8D38:7208:258F:B5F2 (talk) 04:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you add it? Huh?--ML (talk) 16:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the added, "Huh?", I'm sensing your tone to be less than welcoming to this IP user. Please remember to not WP:BITE the newbies. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 17:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm sensing your tone. . ." Really? You have the ability to "sense tone" through the long lines of the Internet? No, of course you don't. Don't make assumptions because your ability to "sense tone" must be broken or lousy (or both), but I think it is figment of an active imagination. Winkelvi, why don't you put Cruz's immigration position in the document, huh?--ML (talk) 19:40, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All we have here in Wikipedia is "tone" via words typed into a computer keyboard and viewed on a computer screen to evaluate and understand what editors are trying to convey, MaverickLittle. Obviously, tone is an issue in Wikipedia as we even have policy regarding it (see WP:TONE for more) in relation to articles. So, yes, tone is something very real here in the world of Wikipedia. We make judgments in editing based on it. While you may scoff at whether or not one is able to sense a tone coming from an editor, be aware that administrators do evaluate tone via those typed words and issue preventative blocks for policy violations in regard to WP:BITE, WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, and WP:BATTLEGROUND based, in various instances, on said tone. You might want to remember that. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 20:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have reviewed your edits and I have reviewed the comments that other editors have said to you. And I have reviewed the edits you have done to my work and the "tone" of your edit summaries to me and toward other editors. And based upon all of that review I can say without hesitation that you are the last person on this planet to lecture anyone about any of those things. As I have told you before and I will repeat right here that you are an edit warrior and you are a bully. Please keep your lectures to yourself and attempt to follow the dictates of those lectures because you don't follow your own advice.--ML (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Content dispute re: Cruz's birthplace

Today I corrected this article's claim that Ted Cruz is "the junior United States Senator from Texas" to read that Cruz is "from Canada, representing Texas." I included a properly-formatted citation, including a hyperlink, to an article from The Dallas Morning News that cites Cruz's birthplace as Canada and that includes an image of Cruz's birth certificate.

One minute later, User:Johnpaul87 deleted this contribution, giving the reason as "fixing vandalism."

I posted a note to this user's Talk page thanking the user for trying to help Wikipedia, but explaining that the contribution was technically not vandalism. There I pointed the user to the Vandalism page, and told the user that's where you can learn Wikipedia's definition of vandalism and how to respond to vandalism effectively.

I will now re-post my earlier addition, but I'm stating this explanation here to avoid an edit war.

(Please note: None of the content I've added addresses whether or not Cruz is eligible for political office; it simply addresses where he was born.)

Thanks, Seanjsavage (talk) 00:55, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note Seanjsavage that Cruz's place of birth has been debated over and over again long before you came to the article. Please check the archives of this talk page. His birth in Calgary, Alberta, Canada is not news to the many, many long-time editors of this particular article. We have debated it forward and backward and sideways. We have reached a calm consensus that the three or four mentions of his place of birth is plenty. Your addition to the first sentence has been proposed and rejected many, many times. Please read the whole article and you will see that there is plenty of discussion of his place of birth. Thanks.--ML (talk) 02:15, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks User:MaverickLittle. I understand your points, and the last thing I want to do is to suggest that we don't have enough mentions of his place of birth – or to reopen the can of worms about whether or not Cruz's birthplace, vs. the amount of time spent in Texas, have bearing or should have bearing on his candidacy.
To clarify: I'm simply pointing out a clear factual error in the article: It reads that Cruz is "from Texas," and that is factually incorrect. As Cruz himself proclaims and as the citation shows, he is from Canada, not from Texas. He moved to Texas, he's not from there. Thank you Seanjsavage (talk) 04:18, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect. He is a senator from Texas. He represents Texas because he is from there. If he were not "from Texas" he would not be eligible to be a senator from Texas. Originally, he is not from Texas, but that's no longer germane in relation to his career in the Senate. Watch CSPAN - you will hear Congresspersons and Senators referred to as "<so and so> the <senator/representative> from <name of state here>. Every instance of Cruz being referred to as "from Texas" in the article is in reference to being a senator from Texas. That is the correct terminology and should not be changed. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:23, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Would employing "...of Texas" – or "...representing Texas" provide a fair compromise that would satisfy you? Either is more accurate and precise, and less likely to be mistaken for meaning he *originates from* Texas.
I haven't seen C-SPAN's stylebook but I think they usually introduce "Sen. [name] **of** (not from) [state]." Two of the three CSPAN vids I just Googled (below) use the "of" style; the third uses "[state] Sen. [name]."
http://www.c-span.org/video/?326552-1/conversation-senator-ted-cruz-rtx
http://www.c-span.org/video/?326735-1/conversation-senator-rand-paul-rky
http://www.c-span.org/video/?326814-1/conversation-senator-bernie-sanders-ivt
Thanks, Seanjsavage (talk) 04:54, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, it wouldn't be a fair compromise, because it's inaccurate. Typically, I eschew any reference to "it's in this similar article, too", but in this case, because we are dealing with politicians/those who hold an office of distinction, I suggest you take a look at the articles for other senators. What do you see directly under their official senate portrait? United States Senator FROM <name of state>. So, that in mind, no, your suggestion is not up for compromise in this case. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:59, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How is "...of Texas" or "...representing Texas" inaccurate? Seanjsavage (talk) 15:15, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is inaccurate as well as inconsistent. My CSPAN example was just one example of when "from Texas" is used. As I already stated, all of our U.S. Senator articles state, "from <name of state>. If you have a problem with that, I suggest you take it up with the project associated with the senator articles.
Further, there are reliable sources that support the same: US Senate bio page, CNN, Mother Jones, WPIX, KTLA, insidegov, Getty images, Newsweek, Politco, etc. There are more -- do I need to post them her or is that enough evidence? Hopefully, these examples in addition to what is already the standard for the U.S. Senate articles within Wikipedia will help you to see that "From" is the appropriate terminology, Seanjsavage. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 15:19, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Seanjsavage, It is not factually incorrect that Cruz "from Texas". You are making an incorrect assumption. Just because someone was not born in Texas, for example, does not mean that person is not "from Texas". He is "from Texas" just as much as Jeb Bush is from Texas or Buddy Holly is "from Texas". Bush and Holly were born in Texas, but they became famous in other places, Bush in Florida and Holly in Nashville and New York. The opposite is also true. George H.W. Bush and his son George W. Bush were born in Massachusetts and Connecticut respectively, but they are both icons of the Lone Star State. We have airports and buildings and highways named after our two sons of Texas, we don't give a flip if they were born here or they adopted our great state. They are as much as "from Texas" as Texas Legends who were born, raised, and died here such as Lyndon B. Johnson, Ann Richards, and Lloyd Bentsen. I hope that clears up that silliness. We don't discriminate about who is a Texan, if you adopt our state you are a Texan. Cruz might have moved here as a 4 years old and he grew up here, but he went off to college, worked in DC for a while but he moved back here and brought his Yankee wife and his children. He is a Texan and it is factually incorrect to say he is not "from Texas".--ML (talk) 15:53, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changed "from Texas", to "for Texas", with the hope that it addresses all concerns. - Cwobeel (talk) 19:42, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To represent a state in Congress you have to live in that state, you literally have to be "from Texas". That is a law. Cruz lives in Houston therefore he is "from Texas". It does not matter where he was born. This is rule for Cruz, for Barbara Boxer, U.S. Senator "from California" (born in Brooklyn, NY), for Bernie Sanders, U.S. Senator "from Vermont" (born in Brooklyn, NY), for Tom Udall, U.S. Senator "from New Mexico" (born in Phoenix, AZ), for John McCain, U.S. Senator "from Arizona" (born in Coco Solo Naval Air Station, Panama Canal Zone), for President Barack Obama, formerly U.S. Senator "from Illinois" (born in Honolulu, Hawaii). So you see where some is born has no bearing on being the Senator "from" wherever. If you live there when you are elected then you are "from" there. It is as simple as that and it lines up with the constitution and federal law. There is no special rule for Cruz. The same rule applies to him that applied to all these other folks that have served in U.S. Senate.--ML (talk) 21:12, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I can't stand the guy, but the guy is from Texas. 70.215.70.113 (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK User:MaverickLittle et al, you raise fair points. Though I still side with Mr. Lyle Lovett on this one: <YouTube video removed per WP copy vio policy>Seanjsavage (talk) 04:10, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. Lyle is just expressing, in a polite way, the same thing that Ray Wylie Hubbard and other Texans think: <YouTube video removed per WP copy vio policy> Have a good day! --ML (talk) 13:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How is this not notable?

I've been adding the information I've obtained from Cruz's book, where in it he explains how he acquired his first name "Ted". Seeing as how this is still the name he uses to this day, wouldn't it be notable to include it? Informant16 23 August 2015

The manner in which it was written and included puts it in the trivia and undue weight categories. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:24, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Shortened and put in in the early life section. I only put it in the education section because the piers he mentioned were from his schooling and he was the same age as he was in the preceding sentence, sort of my attempt to have some chronological order. Informant16 23 August 2015
Felito is not mentioned as his birthname, so the fact that it was changed from Felito to Ted is a little jarring. I still think it's trivial, but, regardless of that, can you please change "piers" to "peers"?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:55, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23, "Felito" is a derivative from the junior nickname for "Rafael"'. Cruz's father is Rafael Sr., Cruz is Rafael Jr. - "Felito" is a shortening of "Rafaelito" ("little Rafael"). So, saying his real name is "Felito" isn't correct, either. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:12, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Winkelvi: You're so smart. I didn't know that. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:34, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some days I am, Bbb23. ;-) -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:39, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
yep. I can confirm that "Felito" is a shortened version of "Rafaelito", which is the diminutive of Rafael. - Cwobeel (talk) 22:47, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cato Institute as a source

I object to this edit which inserts content source solely to the Koch-founded Cato Institute. I would assert that the source is not independent and that the inclusion of this material violates the DUEWEIGHT clause of our neutral POV policy. - MrX 18:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I object to MrX's reversion of this edit because the Cato Institute's trade policy position is in line with the near universal opinion among economists. The Cato Institute is nonpartisan, and recently had a lengthly legal battle with the Koch brothers over the organization's independence from the Koch brothers political activity. I would assert, that despite the Cato Institute's ideology, since their trade policy view is in line with the mainstream view among economists, it constitutes a reliable source and a significant viewpoint, and therefore, does not violate our neutral POV policy. - Jajhill (talk) 18:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the detail about his ancestry comes from Cruz himself rather than secondary sources

There are numerous secondary sources for the claim about Cruz's father's birthplace (Cuba) as well as the claim about Cruz's own birthplace (Canada.) The rest of the data about his pedigree comes from what is at least ostensibly a primary source (although he doubtless had ghostwriters): i.e., Cruz's own memoirs. That includes the claim that his mother was born in Delaware. Some of Cruz's political opponents have started alleging that she was born in Canada. Timothy Horrigan (talk)

Some sources...

Some of these sources are already included.. others no.

--5.170.124.49 (talk) 15:59, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

The lede should not be slanted to recent events. It should be a chronological presentation of this person's biography. - Cwobeel (talk) 14:39, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Political positions split?

Seems to be quite extensive and a significant portion of the article. Should we remove it and give it its own article? - Informant16 14 October 2015

Comments on President Obama

I am attempting to clean up some erroneous references used in this paragraph.

1) calling him "the world's most powerful communist" at the 2015 Values Voter Summit[104] 

 This sentence fragment is not referenced in the "104" reference.  Click on the reference number, follow the given link to the actual article and you'll see what I mean.

2) in harsh terms 

  This is a pejorative comment from the editor and cannot be considered objective.  As such, I deleted it.

3) his ideas 

 I added these words to clarify that Cruz doesn't call the president profoundly dangerous but in fact called his ideas profoundly dangerous.  This addition more accurately reflects Cruz's comments about the president and increase the accuracy of this encyclopedia.

4) [107] I removed this reference since it has nothing to do with the shooting death of Goforth. Again, click the reference, follow the link, and you'll see what I mean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OutPutter (talk • contribs) 07:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Relationships with fellow Republicans

The following sentence has a reference that has apparently never been defined so I deleted the sentence pending proper sourcing.

When Boehner announced in September 2015 that he step down and resign from the House, Cruz "gloated" at the news and accused the speaker of making "a secret and insidious deal with Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi to avert another government shutdown when the current annual budget expires."[117]

[117] looks like this at the bottom of the Cruz article.

Cite error: The named reference 2015VVSummit was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ted_Cruz&oldid=686140548"