Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Hampshire Consequences and The GOPe Road Map Moving Forward
The Conservative Treehouse ^ | 2-10-2016 | sundance

Posted on 02/10/2016 6:32:24 AM PST by smoothsailing

February 10, 2016

New Hampshire Consequences and The GOPe Road Map Moving Forward

by sundance

trump smile 3Last night was a Donald Trump win, period. A YUGE win. For context: Donald Trump beat second place, John Kasich, by more votes (currently 51,000) than Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton (currently 50,000).

A resounding victory for the vulgarian rebel alliance. Today, rejoice, dance well, be of good cheer and enjoy.

However, come sunrise we meet at the old mill, and ride south.

What does last night mean for the GOPe road map? That’s where it gets interesting.

Forget John Kasich; he is irrelevant as an individual candidate. Kasich has no organization, no structural pathway, no ballot access and is not a national candidate. However, his future endorsement of the GOPe candidate (Rubio or Bush) does bring with it his NH delegates…. but that is all.

The biggest loser is also one of our biggest loses, Governor Chris Christie. By coming in sixth, Christie has failed to make the cut for the upcoming CBS debate.

Debate Qualifications: Top three finish in Iowa, or Top five finish in New Hampshire, or top five polling nationally or in South Carolina. (link)

In addition to the debate issues and a financial hurdle, the sixth place finish essentially eliminates any path for Chris Christie. [Team Marco Rubio collectively breathe a sigh of relief.] However, with Christie gone – Jeb Bush also loses a key strategic partner for his own electoral pathway forward.

On the heels of a robotic debate performance, and with a poor fifth place New Hampshire finish, South Carolina just shifted into the MUST WIN column for Marco Rubio.

Rubio’s national strategy is dependent on building upon itself. We can expect some fireworks between camp Bush Super-PAC and camp Rubio Super-PAC over the next ten days as Rubiobot tries to ensure he regains his footing.

fireworksThe CBS South Carolina debate is structurally set up to be as beneficial for Marco Rubio as the ABC New Hampshire debate was for Jeb Bush. New Hampshire was old GOPe money (Bush), South Carolina is new GOPe money (Rubio).

There’s a reason why Dana Perino lives amid her peers in South Carolina.

The FNB North Charleston GOP debate was filled with a Pro-Rubio audience, expect the same thing again with the CBS version. Remember, Paul Ryan and DC leadership approved the text of South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley’s State of the Union response speech against Donald Trump. Nikki Haley was/is lined up to be a top-tier Rubio or Bush VP pick (again, go back to the original road map).

Almost all of the DC GOPe players who are part of the South Carolina coalition will be aligned with Marco Rubio. Examples Tim Scott, Trey Gowdy et al. Lindsey Graham already endorsing Jeb Bush means all of the GOPe eggs are in the GOPe camp candidates. There will be a stacked audience in opposition to the vulgarian Trump.

Those who qualified for the debate include: Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, John Kasich and possibly/tentatively Ben Carson (depending on Carson’s polling). No more than six candidates will be in that debate – and it could possibly be five.

wine-snob-manWith Jeb’s fourth place finish in New Hampshire, ahead of Rubio, he has reasserted himself as the GOPe primary frontrunner.

If Jeb can finish stronger than Rubio in South Carolina Jeb will have the momentum he needs to begin re-establishing his argument. But that’s going to be a challenge.

To achieve his objectives, and to settle the nerves of the donor class, we can expect Jeb to attack Donald Trump in an effort to project his strength. Jeb’s only real opportunity to do this is during the debate.

The victor of the Bush -v- Rubio contest will be determined by who can project themselves (to the donor class) as the best candidate to defeat Donald Trump. Again, old money and old party teams preferring Bush, new money and modern GOPe types preferring Rubio.

The curious questioning on why Carly Fiorina continues in the race will probably intensify. But Carly’s later endorsement is not really a question – it will be either Jeb or Rubio.

South Carolina is going to be a real bloodbath ! There’s an increasing sense of desperation – and to make matters worse, Bernie Sanders is looming large over Hillary Clinton.

Remember, meet at the old mill – we ride at sunrise. !!

trump lion



TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last
To: Yashcheritsiy

Spoken like a true believer! 8^)


41 posted on 02/10/2016 8:19:46 AM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
NH winner take all

NH is proportional.

Trump garnered 10, Kasich 3, Cruz came away with 2 and Bush 2.

42 posted on 02/10/2016 8:26:36 AM PST by M. Thatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
Okay, what exactly do you not understand about Congress being given the enumerated power to create rules pertaining to naturalization.

I cannot believe Americans can even entertain the notion that "anchor" babies are eligible become the President of the United States upon obtaining the age of 35, which is what your interpretation opens us up to. The term "natural born" was included for a reason, otherwise, they would have just said citizen and been done with it.

43 posted on 02/10/2016 8:29:48 AM PST by Robert DeLong (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: andy1954

Rubio has to get the nomination first. Bush and Rubio are unabashed amnesty supporters. If the GOP nominates either one of them, the party is finished along with the country.


44 posted on 02/10/2016 9:06:57 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT

You mean the debate? What does his Majesty the Emperor-Elect have to say about it?

MN and ND will vote for the conservative, like they did last time.


45 posted on 02/10/2016 9:10:34 AM PST by Impy (They pull a knife, you pull a gun. That's the CHICAGO WAY, and that's how you beat the rats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Robert DeLong

“rules of naturalization” means not only who is eligible to be naturalized but also includes:

- the process by which such naturalization must take place
- who is not or never can be naturalized
- those who do not need to be naturalized by the circumstances of their birth
- any and all rules


46 posted on 02/10/2016 9:15:38 AM PST by taxcontrol ( The GOPe treats the conservative base like slaves by taking their votes and refuses to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
Cruz has derivative citizenship thru his mother. It is not automatic like jus solis. Someone has to take an overt action to claim such citizenship.

Cruz was a citizen at birth (jus soils) of Canada. He was a dual national until 20 months ago when he renounced his Canadian citizenship.

There is no doubt that Cruz is a US citizen. The question is whether he is a natural born citizen as it pertains to eligibility to be President under the Constitution. It is not settled law. It needs to be litigated.


47 posted on 02/10/2016 9:18:19 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Robert DeLong
Ted was born abroad but to only 1 citizen parent. However, even if both had been citizen parents, he would still be considered a naturalized citizen

You were correct on most of what you stated, but Cruz is not a naturalized citizen. US Code provides for two methods of citizenship, by birth and naturalization. Cruz obtained derivative citizenship (jus sanguinis) thru his mother. This is considered by birth, since Cruz did not go thru the naturalization process, which is distinctly different than derivative citizenship both in process and substance.

However, the issue of NBC is an open question and needs to be resolved thru the courts. It is not settled law.

48 posted on 02/10/2016 9:24:57 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: kabar
U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual: "Automatic" acquisition of U.S. citizenship after birth, a form of naturalization by certain children born abroad to U.S. citizen parents or children adopted abroad by U.S. citizen parents.

This is Ted's situation.

49 posted on 02/10/2016 10:15:47 AM PST by Robert DeLong (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual: "Automatic" acquisition of U.S. citizenship after birth, a form of naturalization by certain children born abroad to U.S. citizen parents or children adopted abroad by U.S. citizen parents.

This is Ted's situation.

50 posted on 02/10/2016 10:17:25 AM PST by Robert DeLong (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Robert DeLong

title 8 section 1401 Citizen at birth - subsection G qualifies Sen Cruz as a natural born citizen.


51 posted on 02/10/2016 10:20:56 AM PST by taxcontrol ( The GOPe treats the conservative base like slaves by taking their votes and refuses to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Jeb will have to go guns a blazing against Rubio in the debate. That should be the final nail for Rubio if he finishes 3rd or 4th.

Trump, Cruz and Bush move on. The GOPe want only one est. candidate and it will now be Bush. At that point the odds switch, instead of many establishment candidates beating themselves up there will be only one which sets the stage for Cruz and Trump destroying each other to let Jeb! in.


52 posted on 02/10/2016 10:22:56 AM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert DeLong
Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by a Child Born Abroad

Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock

A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen, is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.) The U.S. citizen parent must be the genetic or the gestational parent and the legal parent of the child under local law at the time and place of the child’s birth to transmit U.S. citizenship.

I am a retired FSO who held a consular commission. I also had a child born abroad while being posted at an Embassy. The applicable FAM reference is 7 FAM 1131.6-3 Not Citizens by “Naturalization”

Section 101(a)(23) INA (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(23)) provides that the term "naturalization" means "the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever." Persons who acquire U.S. citizenship at birth by birth abroad to a U.S. citizen parent or parents who meet the applicable statutory transmission requirements are not considered citizens by naturalization.

They are citizens by statue thru derivative citizenship.

53 posted on 02/10/2016 10:47:31 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Impy

MN and ND

Kasich could go for 2nd place.
CRuz wins TEX ...

this is likely to be a dull primary season for the GOP.
Bush Rubio Kasich lack to personality to propel themselves to the front.

And the party regulars will go with Trump over Cruz. The local GOP insiders aren’t particularly negative on the Trumpet.

YEas, CBS decided it is time for Christie to drop out.


54 posted on 02/10/2016 11:07:30 AM PST by campaignPete R-CT (https://www.facebook.com/NHforTedCruz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

“title 8 section 1401 Citizen at birth - subsection G qualifies Sen Cruz as a natural born citizen.”

These efforts to use “title 8 section 1401” from the the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Act as a means of claiming it MAKES, meaning it naturalizes, a child as natural born citizen is about as illiterate, ignorant, and stupid as it can possibly get. Note for the persistently ignorant. YOU CANNOT NATURALIZE A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY A CITIZEN AND ARE NOT ALIEN BORN! Duh!!! Naturalization laws are used to take a person who was born in a foreign jurisdiction, with or without alien citizenship (they can be born stateless) and with or without citizen parents, and MAKES the child by the authority of statutory law of naturalization a person entitled to be CONSIDERED AS if they were an actual citizen or natural born citizen despite not actually being one. Also, it makes absolutely no difference what label is used to describe the naturalized person, alien born or considered as a natural born subject, the person is still naturalized if a statutory law is used to authorize the acquisition and retention of citizenship for the child. Anyone attempting to use a naturalization law like Title 8 to claim a child is a natural born citizen deserves to be laughed off the face of the planet as an irrational Dummy. There is no reason to have any patience with this obvious kind of irrational contradictions in terms.


55 posted on 02/10/2016 12:13:25 PM PST by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: kabar
Do you know for a fact that your circumstances mirror that of Ted circumstances?

After all, you were in service to your country at the time, whereas that does not hold true for Ted.

Furthermore, Ted's father was either a citizen or had applied for Canadian citizenship before Ted's birth. In addition, his mother was listed on the Canadian voter registration rolls as an eligible voter, which begs the question as to whether she also took on Canadian citizenship.

56 posted on 02/10/2016 12:59:19 PM PST by Robert DeLong (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

What is illiterate, ignorant, and stupid is the intentional and willful disregard of Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution specifically enumerating Congress with the exclusive authority to establish all rules for naturalization, INCLUDING who does not need to be naturalized and is a citizen from birth, i.e. natural born citizen.


57 posted on 02/10/2016 1:49:34 PM PST by taxcontrol ( The GOPe treats the conservative base like slaves by taking their votes and refuses to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Robert DeLong

I was not referring to my circumstances, just my professional and personal experience with the issue.

Ted is a US citizen, by birth, not naturalization. The issue is whether he is a NBC or not. It needs to be resolved by the courts.


58 posted on 02/10/2016 2:51:19 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Just a little over the top I would say. Blessings. The country is stronger than you think.


59 posted on 02/10/2016 3:26:28 PM PST by andy1954
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: kabar
I never indicated he was not a citizen, he absolutely is. My contention is that he is not a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution.

The reason I asked about circumstances was because you said your child was a natural born citizen and not a naturalized citizen, while stating your child was born overseas. There is of course a difference between the naturalized citizens at birth, and natural born citizens.

Just as "anchor" babies are citizens at birth, they are not natural born citizens. Some here seem to think they also qualify as citizens who when they obtain the age of 35 are eligible to become the President.

60 posted on 02/10/2016 3:48:01 PM PST by Robert DeLong (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson