[CpnHook]

You totally changed the question, and then claim you answered it.

Because your question proceeded off a faulty premise (that I'm saying jus soli is the sole rule).

Obviously, jus soli isn't applicable for Ted Crus. The question for him turns on jus sanguinis which I've also said we inherited from English law operative at the time of the Constitution (e.g., the James Madison comment).

Clear enough?

[Fantasywriter]

‘Because your question proceeded off a faulty premise (that I’m saying jus soli is the sole rule).’

Lol. You posted to me:

‘He claims that the jus soli rule of citizenship was not the original Constitutional view’

You, by contrast, have claimed too many times to count that it *was* the original rule.

Now you’re claiming otherwise?

Lol.

Well let’s hear you first say it in so many words: ‘Ted Cruz is eligible.’

Then we’ll laugh some more.