Report: Ted Cruz could ride Tea Party support to White House [birther trolls stay out! JimRob]

Washington Examiner ^ | NOVEMBER 1, 2013 AT 11:21 AM | PAUL BEDARD

[SoConPubbie]

The friendly fire directed at Sen. Ted Cruz from establishment Republicans is giving the Texan first-in-line status among Tea Party supporters and building a base for him to run for president, according to a new analysis from the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics.

“To the establishment, Cruz is the embodiment of all the forces conspiring to threaten the GOP's long-term viability. And, on a personal level, they also just can't stand Cruz: He drives them crazy,” wrote Kyle Kondik in Center Director Larry Sabato's popular Crystal Ball.

But, added Kondik, the “venom” directed at Cruz, whose effort to defund Obamacare led to a 16-day government shutdown, makes him an oversized hero to Tea Party supporters.

“Not pleasing the establishment is music to the ears of Tea Party activists, and if anything the shutdown has endeared Cruz even more to them. Assuming Cruz mounts a presidential bid in 2016 — he’s headed to South Carolina next week after his Iowa appearance last Friday (hint, hint) — the Tea Party could be a potent base,” he said.

Kondik took note of the Twitter sneers GOP old bulls fired off as Cruz spoke to Iowa Republicans a week ago. “[Mike] Murphy (@murphymike), an alum from John McCain’s rogue 2000 presidential campaign and a "Meet the Press" regular, was one of the establishment Republicans tweeting snark about Cruz during his speech,” he noted.

Murphy tweeted: “Sounds like we got trouble in River City… Good citizens, make your check payable to Cruz Against Soviet Healthcare. Or just ‘CASH’”

And that’s nothing new, said Kondik: “Ever since he’s been elected, we here at the Crystal Ball have heard groaning from Democrats and Republicans alike about how much they dislike Cruz.”

But could Cruz win the nomination in what’s expected to be a crowded field? A big hurdle might be GOP endorsements, typically from the establishment and to establishment candidates like Mitt Romney.

“At this point, it’s hard to imagine Cruz winning much support from party elites, so he’d have to depend on the Tea Party grassroots,” said Kondik, who noted that both parties have detoured with non-establishment candidates in the past and lost — the Republicans in 1964 with Barry Goldwater and Democrats in 1972 with George McGovern.

His bottom line: “Ted Cruz is riding high in some Republican/Tea Party circles precisely because he aggravates many high-ranking members of his own party. But his icy relationship with those party leaders might cause him problems if and when he decides to run for president.”Paul Bedard, The Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com.

[Godebert]

"I agree with Ramsey, but what Ramsey wrote and how US Law reads are two different things."

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.

That is the law.

[octex]

I just can’t see the GOPe ‘letting’ Cruz walk away w/ the nomination. They will want someone they can control or who ‘thinks’ like they do....and that ain’t Cruz.
************************
Everyone... We’re THREE years away from a POTUS election! Plenty of time to sort through all this mess.

The 2014 mid-term is what we all should be focused on NOW, as it’s only ONE year from now. We have to hold the House and take the Senate, to shut down this idiot now residing in the White House. We also need to take as many lower level positions in States, Counties and Cities as possible.

I believe that the results of the 2014 elections will determine what we can do for candidates for 2016. I’m a Texan and a solid Cruz supporter, but it’s too early for all of this speculation, as many things could happen in the next year or so.

[CelesteChristi]

“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.

That is the law.”

I understand what you’re saying, however, we have no legal definition of Natural Born Citizen, and no one will commit to one - that’s telling in and of itself. Ramsey’s definition is logical, and likely the Founders intent, however I fear that ship has sailed. We can stand on that argument all day, but short of a solid legal definition of Natural Born Citizen we’ll be shouting in the wind.

The coup the Founders feared when writing the law has happened. Reversing the coup is paramount. If Cruz proves to be the cure I’ll swallow my desire to follow Ramsey’s definition and support him. A strict Constitutionalist in the WH is necessary to right the ship. It’s ironic (and somewhat sad) that it may take a Cuban and a posssible violation the 21st to do the job - but it just might. If it does, and it accomplishes the mission, I’m willing to fight for strict definition another day.

[PapaNew]

Didn’t know that. Where is that statute found?

[BAW]

I’m behind Ted Cruz. And I’m Tea Party.

[SoConPubbie]

What a shame that SoConPubbie would actually try to pin constitutionalists against Ted Cruz on a false premise that Senator Cruz is as ineligible as Barack Hussein Obama when the opposite is true.

Really?

Just to be clear, Jim put that there, not me.

[TLI]

BUT, every time I see that pic, I can’t help but stomp my feet and hear this tune in my head:

I see where you're coming from.

But Ted is Texas and that means just one thing...







Good advice for the `rats as well.

.

[Gator113]

Love it!!

[TLI]

Damn good video too, one of their best.

.

[Gator113]

I am a fan.

[Jim Robinson]

FYI: This website supports tea party constitutionalist Ted Cruz for president to the hilt. Those who join with the libs, RINOS and GOP-e to openly work against us on this will be considered our political foe and will be treated accordingly. FR will not be used to harm his chances. Take your birther trolling elsewhere.

[CelesteChristi]

I had my numbers wrong. 14/19 years of age, not 16/21, nevertheless the result is the same.

8 U.S.C. § 1401 (g):

“a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States” before Nov. 14, 1986 is a natural-born citizen only if the citizen parent “was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years” — the same rule that was in place in the early 1960s. See also United States v. Flores-Villar, 497 F. Supp. 2d 1160, 1162-64 (S.D. Cal. 2007) (taking the same view and concluding the change from ten years/five years to five years/two years only applied to people born after 1986), aff’d, 536 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. 2008) (so assuming but not discussing it in detail); Rico-Ibarra v. Mukasey, 281 Fed. Appx. 694, 695 n.1 (9th Cir. 2008) (not precedential).

Full:
8 U.S.C. § 1401(g): a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of Title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of Title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date;

[nutmeg]

Ted definitely has my vote!

[BuckeyeTexan]

The truth is, as borne out by President Reagan, fidelity to Conservative Principle sells. It wins massive victories.

On the other hand, those who go all mushy-mouthed and abandon their principles or who never had any principles in the first place, George H. Bush, John McCain, Bob Dole, Mitt Romney, and lately, Rand Paul, provide, in stark relief, the negative results of such cowardly behavior.

Ann Coulter used to point this out repeatedly. I got so ticked at her when she had a political love affair with Christie and then endorsed Romney. It still makes me mad when I think about it.

[boatbums]

It would be a HUGE and welcome relief to be able to wholeheartedly vote for a presidential candidate for once without having to hold my nose!

GO CRUZ!

[tsowellfan]

Just to be clear, Jim put that there, not me.

Thank you for making that clear and apologize for thinking it was you.

[Candor7]

Any leftist that questions his “natural born” qualifications needs to be answered with a simple punch in the mouth.>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It won’t be the leftists who attack Ted Cruz on this matter.
It will be the likes of John McCain, Karl (Rino Aparatchik)Rove, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul.

Ted needs to man up and get ready to win that fight.

[petercooper]

bttt

[Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears]

I’m down. Let’s take back this country.

[Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears]

Excuse me, but did you just compare Ted Cruz to Lyndon Johnson?