Nope.
Posted on 02/11/2013 6:18:15 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Although he fills an obvious gap for his party, the odds are stacked against him
With Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) giving the Republican response to President Obama's State of the Union address, many are asking if he's the answer to his party's electoral woes.
Time magazine even put him on the cover and asked if he's the Republican savior.
But there are three big reasons why it's unlikely the Florida senator is on a fast track to the presidency in 2016.
1. Republicans almost always pick the next guy in line.
Ever since the untested Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.) lost in a historic landslide in 1964, the Republican Party has nearly always picked a nominee who has previously run for national office. The one exception is George W. Bush — and he was the son of a former president.
2. Rubio would face a very tough field.
The 2012 Republican primaries included many candidates who had no shot at ever winning the nomination. The 2016 field is likely to be packed with plausible candidates. Seasoned politicians like Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Rick Perry, and Paul Ryan are already lined up and mulling possible bids....
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Yes, and I’ve seen and heard these discussions before all over.
Regardless, there’s no way any court questions Rubio’s status as a natural born citizen. If he’s the candidate, he’s the candidate. Like I said, Rubio’s not my first choice. I completely disagree with his amnesty plan, and he’s been mightily silent on the 2nd Amendment.
Serious question that a lot of people really need to wrap their head around and ponder the relevance of...
Since when is being unelectable a hurdle to the GOP nomination?
There is only one reason! Dr. Ben Carson
When did Jeb Bush run for national office?
1. It's
2. Jeb's
3. turn
Those two are conservatives. I would gladly vote for either of them or both of them.
I’m curious: Has Rubio’s natural born status ever been before a court? If you have a reference, I’d love to see it.
I would want to know why the issue has arisen, if it has, since he has never run for President.
Nope.
He isn’t a naturalized citizen. The Constitution only envisioned three types and one type are all deceased at this point.
No, but they wanted him last time. He has waited through two elections now. It’s his turn (in the elite minds)
Christie makes Romney look like Reagan and McCain look like Eisenhower. If that’s the direction they want to go in, they can do it without me.
I’d love to see the case law that the birthers rely on for their definition of “natural born citizen.” It seems like you’ve taken the a term, natural born citizen, and somehow pontificated that it means that both parents must have been citizens of the US at the time of birth. I fail to see that definition of natural born citizen anywhere in the Constitution or in case law.
I think I was asking if you know of any cases dealing with the Rubio Natural Born status, since you were talking about what the courts would do.
I guess the answer was that you don’t know of any.
He isn't the Posterity of We the People, either. At least the Constitution envisioned that, too.
-PJ
We the People of the United States, in Order to... secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.Why call out a "natural born citizen" nowhere else in the Constitution except for the eligibility of the highest office, unless you wanted it to be the most restrictive qualification?
We know that the Founders wanted to "secure" liberty to themselves and their posterity. We know what posterity is, it's the children. "Ourselves" are "We the People" who established the Constitution. "Secure" meant only themselves and their children and their children's children, and so on.
So it's obvious that the Founders meant that natural born citizens were the children of citizens, the "Posterity" of "We the People" for whom the Constitution was established to secure.
-PJ
“He isn’t the Posterity of We the People, either”
Neither is anyone whose lines don’t extend back to 1789 in America, which includes very nearly every born citizen.
Still pimping your idea that only white descendants of the founding generation are full citizens?
So the question is will you assist in pushing the GOP further into Democrat policies by voting for him?
Because all the Romney campaigners stupidly bitch about the current liberalism in the GOP when so many of them gave them Carte Blanche to go leftward by embracing a Republican with his record as their candidate.
They can call me names and deny it, but facts on the ground (the rush left by the GOP claiming a moderation in the beliefs of their base) proves it to be the truth.
Who has the standing to challenge his eligibility? Certainly not a private citizen. I guess if a state left Rubio off a ballot due to eligibility concerns, and Rubio challenged, a court would hear. Other than that... not many options.
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.