“The Cruz supporters here think his “poison pill†explanation for his maneuvers during the Gang-of-Eight debates in 2013 were just brilliant. The real question is, what will the vast majority of potential supporters who don’t keep close track of such things think about the “poison pill†explanation?
Might it turn out to be so “brilliant†that only a few can understand it, or are willing to buy into it?”
That stuff is three-dimensional political wonk crap. Most people don’t understand, and simply want straight talk.
Sorry Ted. You are very intelligent, but short on common sense for the average guys and gals.
And Trump is entirely correct, the eligibility issue is not settled.
The historical FACT is we have NEVER had a President born outside the US. That means there is NO legal precedent in case law, concerning the Presidency.
This is what's always bothered me. I just don't think it's a good strategy to go with someone the Dems can take out at the last minute.
In 2008, we had such a candidate run and lose.
If he had won, the case would not have gone to court. It would have come down to that boring joint session of Congress on 6 January 2009 at 1300 EST, Dick Cheney in charge, when they officially counted the electoral votes. If the foreign-born McCain had had more electoral votes, he would have been President, removable only by the impeachment process.
In the event, the natural born Kenyan-commie-in-his-own-mind turned out of have the most votes, so he was President, removable only by the impeachment process.
It's possible for congress critters to object to a state's electoral votes. In that case, the House and Senate have two hours to consider the objection. If both houses agree, the electoral votes are rejected.
If, after all objections, no candidate has a majority of the electoral votes, it is up to the House, voting state by state, to pick the President.
Notice that the Supreme Court, nor any courts, have any role in the process.
If Cruz were to run and win the majority of the electoral votes, he would be President, constitutional law quacks notwithstanding!