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 ...
It really does not matter what you fail to see. If the dems see Rubio as a threat at all, we will be told that natural born citizen means you must have at least one citizen parent. Rubio had no citizen parents and Obama, who can’t even produce a valid birth certificate, will be held up as legal because his (underage) mother was a citizen. Even though the rule was that the father determines citizenship of the child, they won’t mention that because to them it won’t matter in this case, because none of Rubio’s parents were citizens.
You’d better believe that every news network, nightly news show, newspaper and magazine remaining in this country will hound us to death on that fact. Someone will take Rubio to court and if the GOP validates him to run, they will make the validators look like imbeciles trying handle all the court cases. The states will spend more money on court cases than they will on the elections. Just ask Sarah Palin how litigious those dems can be.
The dems won’t give him a pass. I don’t see how anyone could imagine starting an election with one foot already in the grave and their hands tied behind their backs. But then again if you’re a good RINO candidate running for president, handpicked by the RNC, your goal isn’t to win anyway. They haven’t in two elections. Why change now?
“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
If this Article disqualifies Rubio, it would seemingly disqualify every candidate.
I’m not willing to disqualify Rubio in 2013. Romney had a whole term as governor where he pushed liberal legislation, and McCain had a long career as the “Maverick” voting for liberal policies. Rubio’s not my top candidate, but I’m not lumping him with those two either.
Surely you’re aware there was such a thing as new people joining a country back when the Constitution was written. But somehow securing liberty for them and their posterity means the Constitution isn’t for the future of anybody besides their children? Does that mean anyone naturalized after 1789 or born a citizen from at least one side that wasn’t around in ‘89 don’t have freedom of speech or due process rights, either?
Oh, wait, the presidency is purportedly really, really important and restricted, so you know the requirement must have been two citizen parents. Then why pull in the “ourselves and our posterity” stuff? That’s legal and logical gobbledygook. Nevermind, all in fun. I don’t say on the face of it why natural born can’t mean merely born a citizen. That’s certainly a restriction. But you see something I don’t, and can divine exactly how much restriction was implied. Why stop there, I wonder. How do you know they wanted only second generation naturals? Why not require citizen grandparents or great grandparents? That’d be even more restrictive, and according to you therefore more probable.
By the way, even if you have two citizen parents you can be off the “our posterity” list, according to your reading, if your forebears migrated here in 1790 or later. So, once again, your posterity citation is unsound.
Misrepresenting my words won't work, because we all know that you know what I'm saying. Your mockery won't work.
We the People are not the original founding citizens.
We the People are the citizens of the United States. Anyone who becomes naturalized joins We the People.
Once they are one of We the People, their Posterity are natural born citizens.
Are you now going to argue that the phrase "the several States" only applies to the original 13 states?
-PJ
I don’t think liberals will even be the problem with Rubio. Much like Clinton first raised concern’s about Obama’s eligibility, I’m sure one of his primary opponents will raise concerns about Rubio’s eligibility.
However, the challenge will go nowhere. Rubio was born in the United States. There’s no case law supporting any of these notions about “natural born citizen” and a court isn’t going to venture into this territory in 2013.
So can I safely accept that his campaigning for amnesty/DREAM act nonsense is not something you consider a disqualifier?
No because I don’t see a compromise being reached on border security, so I don’t really think the immigration legislation will pass the House and Senate.
And there are currently only two ways of becoming one of We The People. Either born a citizen or naturalized as a citizen.
Posterity is also the children's children.
Talking about the language, Founding Father Thomas Paine also wrote of "antiquity." He used "antiquity" to refer to what we owed to those who came before us, as a counter to what we owed to our "posterity" who follow. Paine did not mean to limit "antiquity" to just his parents.
I'm simply quoting the Constitution, and nothing more. You can call that unsound if you wish.
-PJ
If the republicans were smart, they would not allow someone of questionable legality to run. But they don’t call it the “stupid party” for nothing. It does not matter what a party rival may do to Rubio, the democrats know how to effectively use simple mistakes against republicans. If Rubio runs, it will be a mistake. Through their friends in the MSM, the dems will make sure the entire country knows it.
Then I am sorry to see that FR has taken another moderate on board wanting his cake and wanting to eat it too.
That is correct.
I'm talkiing about born TO a citizen. You just said "born a citizen."
Natural born citizens are We the People. But not all We the People are natural born citizens.
The Posterity of We the People are natural born citizens. The posterity of someone who is not We the People is not a natural born citizen.
-PJ
“... Lou Fry and he said they will put up Jeb and Rubio.”
They CAN’T. Both candidates for POTUS and VPOTUS can’t be from the same state. Remember, Cheney went back to WY to change his registration from TX?
Amen!
typical RAT, doesn’t care about the CONSTITUTION
Unless he starts raising his voice, he doesn’t have a prayer.
I don't have a particularly high opinion of any politician, you may have noticed.
My scale ranges among degrees of loathing and mistrust.
Yes they are. There are currently only two types of citizens, as outlined by the Constitution. Where do you find a third?
I am a moderate because I haven’t written off Rubio in 2013? I’m about as far right as they come. However a candidate doesn’t need to pass a hundred percent purity test for me to vote for them. On top of that, from what I can tell only Sarah Palin passes your purity test...
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.