Posted on 01/15/2016 4:08:47 PM PST by Red Steel
Ted Cruz believes he can win some blue states in a general election, specifically Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and New Hampshire - all states the Republican nominee lost to Barack Obama in the 2008 and 2012 elections.
Cruz said Mitt Romney and John McCain, the past two Republican nominees for president, lost those states because millions of conservatives didn’t vote.
Story Continued Below
"We haven't been bringing out the Reagan Democrats. I believe our campaign will do that,†Cruz said in an interview with U.S. News & World Report published Thursday. "And I'll point out, what we do know doesn't work is following the Bob Dole-John McCain-Mitt Romney plan - that, we know, produces double-digit losses. So, the Washington conventional wisdom is that we need to keep moving further and further left and sounding more and more like the Democrats. And every time we do that we lose by bigger and bigger margins."
In New Hampshire, the first-in-the-nation primary state, Cruz polls fourth in a RealClearPolitics average of state polls at 10.8 percent. Donald Trump dominates the field at 30 percent, but Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Ohio Gov. John Kasich are in striking distance at 13 and 11 percent, respectively. Cruz maintains that his campaign is "underestimated" there but that his message is resonating with voters.
"Again looking at the informed voters, when we're there in front of a rally, early on, our rallies had two and three times the number of people that the Jeb Bush and Scott Walker rallies had, back when they were the expected dominant players," he said."“So I believe the message resonates well there."
"We have not put the resources into TV yet; we just went up on air, so we will be," Cruz continued. "Many of the people statewide haven't heard our message and have heard everybody else's. So I think we have a lot of upside. It's fairly remarkable, given that the rest of the field has spent $50 million, we've spent zero, that we are, in a variety of polls, essentially in a three--way tie for second."
It is absolutely in the constitution!! Clear as a bell. Cruz will lose this fight real bad. NEWT for VP!!
....And much needed time of rebuilding.
“The landslide will be for Hillary. Trump pisses off more folks than you care to admit.”
You’re not very politically astute, are you. You’ll have lots of words to eat after Trump becomes your President.
“The landslide will be for Hillary. Trump pisses off more folks than you care to admit.”
You’re not very politically astute, are you. You’ll have lots of words to eat after Trump becomes your President.
This election is existential. Win it with the wrong Republican and we lose America through amnesty and political correctness. Lose it to a Dem and there will be amnesty and national health care to replace Obamacare, and replacement of American voters by new ones. It will be all over for us, the remnants.
So, nice try, but this isn't 1952. That was America. This isn't.
I agree. I think he could have come back better to what Trump said, instead of applauding and looking meek.
I disagree. We shall see.
No doubt about that. It’s now or never.
Illegal aliens started voting. They got rid of B1 Bob in Orange County, and a whole lot more followed. Now it is 2/3 Democrat in the state offices, and no Republican can win any state wide office. And that change in demographics is coming to America after amnesty. Stop amnesty or everything else is not worth talking about.
Lol...say hello to Godwin for me dummy.
You keep saying this, but that has not been held by the Supreme Court. You have been shown this by multiple people on other threads.
Citizen does not equal natural born citizen, when you depend on a statute passed by Congress to give you citizenship.
Maybe, but can he win any states in the primaries? Much less the minimum of 8 to even be nominated?
Maybe, but can he win any states in the primaries? Much less the minimum of 8 to even be nominated?
That is a big problem for Cruz.
Your confusion seems to lie in the notion that Congress can alter the Constitutional eligibility requirements via the definition of NBC. It cannot.
The definition of NBC is fixed as it was written. Based on the changes Madison made to the Naturalization Act of 1795, it’s highly likely Madison intended to incorporate a jus soli - rule of the soul - approach. Ie born here - nbc, not born here - not a nbc.
“It is absolutely in the constitution”
Of what nation? The US Constitution does NOT specify that a natural born citizen must be born in the US. And 18 months after it was ratified the first naturalization act specifically said that natural born status applied to certain citizens born OUTSIDE of the US:
United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790
Titled: “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization”
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens : Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.
Yikes - how's that for a huge goof.
Old man, fading memory.
It clearly does. There is no question. But if you think you are right— Cruz needs to get to the court before the Democrats. — Right? Does Cruz not get to the Supreme Court before the Democrats. Do you think because you have a distorted opinion that the Democrats will not TAKE THIS TO THE ROBERTS SUPREME COURT? Are you nuts?
You smell like a troll.
Welcome to Free Republic. Is the reason you finally got around to joining this forum less than a year ago due to an eagerness to troll conservative websites or did you just recently become an adult?
I started to read the comments on this thread and thought I had pulled up DU by mistake.
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.