Ted Cruz Ping! If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
CRUZ or LOSE!
Posted on 04/27/2015 10:51:35 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Bill Kristol writes in this week's newsletter:
About 7,500 votes were cast in The Weekly Standard's third presidential poll of the year, twice as many as in the poll a couple of months ago. In that straw poll (and, to repeat, these are obviously not scientific surveys, but rather polls of those who chose to participate), Scott Walker, was far ahead, with almost half the first place votes. He still leads, but has come back to the field some. He's got 30% of the first place ballots, and appears on an impressive 69% of all ballots as a first, second or third choice. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio have surged to second and third place, with 24% and 18% first place choices respectively; Rubio appears on 51% of ballots, Cruz on 45%. These are the big three on this week's survey: No one else gets more than 5% of first place votes, or appears on more than 18% of ballots overall.
So: We have (for now!) a three-way race among TWS voters, with Walker holding a modest lead over Cruz and Rubio, and everyone else far behind. The second tier is mostly unchanged, except that Ben Carson has faded, and Carly Fiorina has surged, especially as a second or third choice. (Come see her in conversation at the Broadmoor next month-- a few slots are still left!)
He’s making a lot more “personal appearances” than the media lets on. It’s just when they think thy can use one against him in some way (i.e., the gay hoteliers) that you hear about it. The meeting with the two businessmen has garnered Cruz at least $15 million dollars worth of free publicity, and I’m probably low-balling it.
Ah poor guy.
Ted Cruz Ping! Born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada to a Cuban father and American mother, Cruz’s constitutional eligibility in regard to the “natural born Citizen” clause in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution has been questioned by many.
The “natural born Citizen” requirement is believed by numerous constitutional scholars to indicate a higher level of citizenship and allegiance than simply “a Citizen.”
Columnist JB Williams has suggested that both of Cruz’s parents obtained Canadian citizenship while they were working in the oil industry in Canada in the late 1960s. Cruz’s father, Rafael Bienvenido Cruz, has affirmed that he became a Canadian citizen during that time.
On August 19, 2013, The Dallas Morning News reported that Cruz was born a dual Canadian-U.S. citizen, although no documentary evidence has been presented. Cruz’s birth certificate released to the publication at the time confirms his Canadian birthplace. In response, Canadian immigration attorneys and government officials reportedly told the newspaper that anyone born in Canada, regardless of the parents’ citizenship, is automatically granted Canadian citizenship.
Cruz claimed not to have been aware that he was a Canadian citizen for his entire life until renouncing that citizenship in May of last year in apparent preparation to launch a presidential campaign.
The News additionally reported that Cruz’s mother “registered his birth with the U.S. consulate” and that Cruz traveled on a U.S. passport in 1986 while on a high school trip. However, no documentation supporting the claims was presented.
Of course, he IS the new neo-con. Him and Jeb.
I really can’t, I think Rubio and Walker are benefiting from good press and Cruz is suffering a little from a media blackout. But, if he cleans the floor with the GOP candidates in a debate the media will HAVE to talk about him.
Since most of the “Weakly Standard” writers are pro amnesty, this is not a bad result for Cruz. If Walker had not beat Cruz, they would have buried the poll.
all 3 are fine with me.....I’ll stay home before Id vote for Bush/huckster or Christie. And Id vote for the beast before Rand Paul....
“...Do think Cruz is eligible to run for President under the Constitution?...”
His is not, nor did he need to be, a “naturalized” citizen. Hence, that leave only one citizenship class for him: Natural Citizen.
So with those readily available facts, how about you answer your own question: Is Cruz eligible to run for President under the US Constitution?
Walker is the only person running who has taken on a left shibboleth and won. Just saying.
We really don't know. SCOTUS has yet to define what is meant by a "natural born citizen." We need that question resolved sooner rather than later. They had a opportunity to do that with Obama. The Senate commissioned Olsen and Tribe to come up with an opinion on McCain. You can read their decision here" They eventually issued a resolution saying McCain was eligible. If you read their conclusions, they include Obama and say he was natural born because he was born on US soil. McCain was born in Panama.
I have some problems with the Olson/Tribe conclusions, which support both jus sanguinis and jus solis as natural born citizens. One out of every 10 births in this country is to an illegal alien parent. Under US law, birthright citizenship, if you are born on US territory, you are automatically a citizen. Hence anyone born on US soil could run for President. Is that what the Founders meant?
I don't want to get too far into the legal weeds with you on this issue, but there was quite a controversy at the time over Chester Arthur's eligibility for the Presidency under the Constitution because his father was not an American citizen at the time he was born and that he was born in Canada.
I can see this issue coming to the fore the closer Cruz gets to the top of the pile. I wonder if the Reps in Congress will push for another legal opinion to have a similar resolution issued for Cruz.
It matters not what the intent of the founders was. Our legal system has evolved to control by precedent. “Stare-Decisis” is the order of the day — *not* what congress or some other politician, pundit, historian or community standards my opine otherwise.
Like it or not, 0bama has set the precedent. As long as one of your parents was a citizen, then you are too. Even if that parent was a minor. As far as proof goes, an obviously digitally manipulated image of a birth certificate is adequate. Even with that shaky set of bonafides, there has been no comnpetent authority at any level (local, state, federal, martian) who has expressed the least bit of interest in challenging 0bama, beyond a scattering of isolated lip-flapping with no actionable intent.
So, given all that, who do you honestly expect will challenge Cruz?
I’ll go you one better, let’s say for the sake of argument that Cruz is an outright illegal alien — admitted, documented, proven. I’d still vote for him, even if I had to write his name in compared to everyone else running GOP, DEM, Libertarian, Green or any other party affiliation. I personally do not care what Cruz’s citizenship status is, he is far more qualified and is the sole candidate with the nations bests interests at heart. I can’t think of any other candidate that this nation more desperately needs.
Tell that to Antonin Scalia. There have been plenty of "Stare Decisis" judgments overruled by higher or different courts. This has never been decided by SCOTUS and it will at some point have to be given the high percentage of foreign born in this country.
Like it or not, 0bama has set the precedent. As long as one of your parents was a citizen, then you are too. Even if that parent was a minor.
It was never tested in the courts so no precedent was ever set. Obama spent millions preventing it from getting a fair hearing. Lack of standing was a common ruling tossing the case out of court.
So, given all that, who do you honestly expect will challenge Cruz?
I suspect that it will be one of those issues planted by the Clinton camp or perhaps even a Rep in the MSM, which will show some interest this time. It will raise questions and doubt among some voters. The fact that the Senate felt compelled to do a resolution on McCain's eligibility should tell you something. And the findings also asserted that Obama was eligible because he was born on American soil seems to be the real reason the issue was raised. Also, Cruz felt compelled to renounce his Canadian citizenship. Why?
On August 19, 2013, The Dallas Morning News reported that Cruz was born a dual Canadian-U.S. citizen, although no documentary evidence has been presented. Cruz’s birth certificate released to the publication at the time confirms his Canadian birthplace. In response, Canadian immigration attorneys and government officials reportedly told the newspaper that anyone born in Canada, regardless of the parents’ citizenship, is automatically granted Canadian citizenship.
Cruz claimed not to have been aware that he was a Canadian citizen for his entire life until renouncing that citizenship in May of last year in apparent preparation to launch a presidential campaign.
The News additionally reported that Cruz’s mother “registered his birth with the U.S. consulate” and that Cruz traveled on a U.S. passport in 1986 while on a high school trip. However, no documentation supporting the claims was presented.
The week before announcing his bid for the U.S. presidency, two former Solicitors General wrote an opinion piece published in the Harvard Law Review asserting that Cruz is a “natural born Citizen” because he has one U.S.-citizen parent.
I want this resolved not only because of Cruz, but also, because of the millions of "anchor babies" born to illegal aliens and the millions of more children born overseas to US citizen parents. It is a constitutional issue that should be resolved.
I’ll go you one better, let’s say for the sake of argument that Cruz is an outright illegal alien — admitted, documented, proven. I’d still vote for him, even if I had to write his name in compared to everyone else running GOP, DEM, Libertarian, Green or any other party affiliation. I personally do not care what Cruz’s citizenship status is, he is far more qualified and is the sole candidate with the nations bests interests at heart. I can’t think of any other candidate that this nation more desperately needs.
If Cruz is as big an adherent and defender of the Constitution as you think he is, he would refuse to run. We are either a nation of laws or we are not. Officials sworn to protect and defend the Constitution should be held to the same standards as everyone else. You sound more like a liberal than a conservative.
A poll I want to believe in!
“...You sound more like a liberal than a conservative...”
Opinions vary. I will choose “Country” over “Party” and “Concern Trolls” every time.
“...If Cruz is as big an adherent and defender of the Constitution as you think he is, he would refuse to run...”
OOOH!! You are soooo close. It’s right there in front of you! Just follow that train of thought and you will have escaped “Conspiracy” land and rejoined us here in “reality” land.
It sounds like you are choosing lawlessness over the Constitution. I guess you must destroy the Constitution in order to save it.
“...It sounds like you are choosing lawlessness over the Constitution. I guess you must destroy the Constitution in order to save it...”
Thanks for the clarification Capt Hyperbole!! So your argument is if Cruz runs or anyone votes for him, then they are “destroying the constitution”. Is that your argument? Seriously?
So, *YOU* know better than Ted Cruz as to the constitutionality of *anything*? The same Ted Cruz described by his Constitutional Law Professors as “off the charts brilliant”? You expect anyone here to believe *YOU* know the Constitution better than Cruz does? That’s laughable!!
Listen up sweetheart... I’m sure you think highly of yourself, but you’ve just given us a peek at the depths of your lib-tard idiocy and I’m fairly certain we haven’t seen just how low you can go just yet. When you find yourself in a hole, you should stop digging. But I’m betting you won’t...
I’ll give you one more chance to prove that just because everyone doesn’t want to play your silly lib-tard game, that does not give you standing to be such an unprovoked jerk. So if I do not reply to you further, then guess what — it is because you are still demonstrating (for everyone to see) that you are still being a lib-tard, concern-troll jerk. Why don’t you head on back over to huffingtonpost or whatever liberaltopia rock you crawled out from under and let them know that your pathetic attempt at a concern-troll post against the best conservative running didn’t work out like you thought it would.
Bub-Bye sunshine!
No, it was directed specifically at you and your contention that you would vote for Cruz even if he was a proven illegal alien and was not eligible to run under the Constitution. You either believe in the Rule of Law or you don't.
So, *YOU* know better than Ted Cruz as to the constitutionality of *anything*? The same Ted Cruz described by his Constitutional Law Professors as “off the charts brilliant”? You expect anyone here to believe *YOU* know the Constitution better than Cruz does? That’s laughable!!
LOL. You are a bloomin' idiot. I can read and comprehend what the Constitution specifies as to the eligibility to be President of the United States. It really isn't rocket science or something that requires a constitutional scholar to determine.
I’ll give you one more chance to prove that just because everyone doesn’t want to play your silly lib-tard game, that does not give you standing to be such an unprovoked jerk. So if I do not reply to you further, then guess what — it is because you are still demonstrating (for everyone to see) that you are still being a lib-tard, concern-troll jerk. Why don’t you head on back over to huffingtonpost or whatever liberaltopia rock you crawled out from under and let them know that your pathetic attempt at a concern-troll post against the best conservative running didn’t work out like you thought it would. Bub-Bye sunshine!
When you can't engage in civil discourse to discuss substantive issues, your only fallback is ad hominem attacks. Grow up and get better informed.
Oh, like when you started slinging unfounded accusations, Capt Hyperbole? Pot, Meet Kettle! You started it sunshine. I just righteously spanked you in public for it and now you're all butt-hurt. Cry me a river.
"...You either believe in the Rule of Law or you don't..."
As a constitutional lawyer who has argued before the supreme court and was described by his professors as "off the charts brilliant" do you think Cruz would be running if he were not eligible? Do you think Cruz would be running if he were an illegal alien (a hypothetical, ridiculous example given to show how idiotic your concern-troll premise is)? A concern troll will answer that question with a hedge like, "I don't know". Someone being intellectually honest only needs a "Yes" or a "No".
"...I can read and comprehend what the Constitution specifies as to the eligibility to be President of the United States..."
No, you can't. You have yet to demonstrate even a basic level of understanding of what you read, even here with simple comments in plain language. Until you do, your patently ridiculous opinions can and should be safely disregarded. Until you can produce a court defensible precedent that shows Cruz is ineligible; Until you can show that Cruz was incorrectly deemed a Natural Citizen (because he was *not* "naturalized", ergo, he's a "Natural" citizen); then your premise has no merit. At all. It's a non-starter. All you have proven yourself to be is a common, garden-variety "concern-troll" who can't even back up his laughable premise at the slightest hint of objection.
You should probably crawl back under whatever slimy huffingtonpost rock you lib-tard nuts live under. Spank you very much.
You need to reread your own posts. I never used the terms Capt Hyperbole or Pot, meet Kettle. You did.
Until you can produce a court defensible precedent that shows Cruz is ineligible; Until you can show that Cruz was incorrectly deemed a Natural Citizen (because he was *not* "naturalized", ergo, he's a "Natural" citizen); then your premise has no merit. At all. It's a non-starter. All you have proven yourself to be is a common, garden-variety "concern-troll" who can't even back up his laughable premise at the slightest hint of objection.
Mark my words, it will become an issue. It needs to be addressed now so that Cruz can campaign without this distraction. The Senate issued a resolution in 2008 deeming that McCain was eligible to run for the Presidency after commissioning Tribe and Olson to write an opinion. Something similar needs to be done now at the very least. It would be better if SCOTUS issued an opinion defining what natural born citizen means in terms of eligibility for the Presidency. We don't need another birther issue.
You should probably crawl back under whatever slimy huffingtonpost rock you lib-tard nuts live under. Spank you very much.
Idiot
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.