Posted on 02/10/2016 9:20:33 AM PST by dmzTahoe
Three words that will silence Rubio and Cruz and dramatically contrast Mr. Trump's strength to the Senatots' weakness...
When Mr. Trump is debating, and the establishment Senators (Cruz and Rubio) start proudly saying what they have done in "leading" the fight against this or that, or pushing this or that legislation, I wish Mr Trump would look at them in the eyes and say...
"That's very noble of you to lead the fight, Senator, but tell me something about those efforts... DID YOU WIN? It's one thing to fight for something, but if you don't win, you are a loser. America doesn't need a loser. America needs someone who wins. And that's not you, Senator."
DID YOU WIN?
Marco: "I led the fight against..."
Trump: "Did you win?"
Cruz: "I stood in the Senate and led the fight against..."
Trump: "Did you win?"
Trump is a proven winner. What have Cruz and Rubio won? America will note the difference
Election won.
Perhaps it is because New York borders Canada that you seem to want to ignore the eligibility clause in our Constitution. From what I have learned through the years many New Yorkers have Canadian relatives.
Cruz is not eligible to be our President and a Cruz Presidency would set a disastrous precedent. Cruz may be a fine man but the next election or another in the future may have a candidate born in a nation that is not as friendly and as comfortable to us as Canada. It does seem a horrible circumstance of birth but life is not a bed of roses is it?
Wish someone would ask Trump, “How many abortions have you financed and how many of those were your own blood?”
He has been so cocky over how many women he has had.
Next question, “How many conservative issues have you fought for before congress and how many did you win?”
Never!
Former Solicitor General Paul Clement,[146][147] former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal,[146][147] Professor Chin (see above),[142] Temple University Law School Professor Peter Spiro,[148] Professor Akhil Amar,[149] Georgetown University Law Center Professor Randy Barnett,[150] Yale Law School Professor Jack Balkin,[150] and University of San Diego Professor Michael Ramsey[150] believe Cruz meets the constitutional requirements to be eligible for the presidency. Similarly, Bryan Garner, the editor of Black's Law Dictionary, believes the U.S. Supreme Court would find Cruz to be eligible.[151]Tribe, however, described Cruz's eligibility as "murky and unsettled".[152] Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein believes that Cruz is eligible, but agrees with Ramsey that Cruz's eligibility is not "an easy question". Sunstein believes concerns over standing and the political-question doctrine will prevent the courts from resolving issues surrounding Cruz's eligibility.[153]
Mary McManamon (see above) writing in the Catholic University Law Review[154] believes that Cruz is not eligible because he was not born in the United States.[155] Professor Elhauge,[156] Professor Clinton,[157] and University of Chicago Professor Eric Posner[158] agree with McManamon that Cruz is not eligible. Alan Grayson, a Democratic Member of Congress from Florida, does not believe Cruz is a natural-born citizen, and stated he intends to file a lawsuit should Cruz be the Republican nominee.[159] Orly Taitz, Larry Klayman, and Mario Apuzzo, who each filed multiple lawsuits challenging Obama's eligibility, have also asserted that Cruz is not eligible.[160][161]
Cruz's eligibility has been questioned by some of his primary opponents, including Donald Trump,[162] Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Carly Fiorina, and Rand Paul.[163] Marco Rubio, however, believes Cruz is eligible.[164]
This is from Wikipedia with footnotes to document facts. Not settled is it?
I used wikipedia because it consolidates sources. That is not a full list.
Read up on Cruz. Universally disliked by his former a nd present colleagues. In favor of cutting our seniors Social Security.
You’d “rather be a loser”? And “Some folks have standards”?
And some of those “folks” have no idea what will happen to the women and girls of their families if illegal immigration and Muslim influx isn’t stopped. Cruz is not committed to securing the borders.
You just proved my point the vitriol
I doubt many Cruz folks sit home in November but be my guest
My bad. I should have said some of the states Board of Elections has deemed him eligible.
“She stood her ground.”
That’s a noble way to say that she tried to extort more money from Trump by continuing to up the asking price. He finally walked away. So she “stood her ground” so well that she screwed her family out of a sale price that he would have paid at more than twice its value.
She kept the house. Children sold it at a pitiful cost. I’ll bet they’re glad she “stood her ground”.
And these people can’t understand how/why Trump won. Exit polling indicated that almost 70% of voters are against Muslims coming into the U.S. “Immigration” isn’t limited to Mexicans; it includes Muslims as well. Trump is the only one adamant about stopping this. Rubio and Cruz support it.
Let me ask you this. Would you vote for him if ALL the Board of Elections of every state find him eligible or only if it goes to the Supreme Court? And what if it never goes before the Supreme Court?
Interesting rant. we will see what we will see when we see what we see ...
I’m not disputing that, I’m simply pointing out that the premise is a no sequitur and that if Trump wins and doesn’t have the support of majorities he will be just as effective as Rubio or Cruz, unless he rules by fiat, which I believe he condemned bammy for.
A good portion of what he's running on will be up to him alone to perform. EO and EM reversal for starters.
I could only vote for him if the matter was truly settled by the Supreme Court or legislation through congress.
I would suggest Ted Cruz end his campaign and work in the Senate on legislation that will decide the matter once and for all.
I would even agree with a clarified definition of natural birth to parents, one being an American citizen, born anywhere in the Western Hemisphere with the logic that the USA took on a unilateral protection of any nation in the Americas under "The Monroe Doctrine." This interpretation would have effectively accepted almost all of the Presidents and candidates that had eligibility issues in the past. Sorry Arnold, still not you.
The Bill that Ted Cruz might author could also clarify the intent of the 14th Amendment to eliminate the possibility of anchor babies going forward. Even as a new Constitutional Amendment that would probably pass ratification in record time.
lol Then Ted Cruz could run again with no questions and a "yuge" accomplishment on his c.v.
I have family members in Virginia and California who usually vote Dem, who are Trump supporters. It’s anecdotal I know, but I thought I’d share that. I’ve heard similar stories about disillusioned Dems or Dem-leaning independents who plan to vote for Trump from a couple dozen people (either talking about themselves or people they know, usually because of the immigration issue, his anti-establishment/political corruption stance, or his anti-PC, tough talk). I have yet to personally find even one independent (much less a Dem) who supports Ted Cruz.
Cruz is my second choice still but I don’t really know if he can even win all of Romney’s states. Running up very high percentages in solidly red states isn’t going to win him the election, and that’s something that scares me about a possible Cruz nomination. Compare that for example with the Michigan poll from a couple of weeks ago that showed Trump easily beating Hillary in that state. It’s the states that matter after all, and Trump can appeal to the people in more states with his populist, pro-US manufacturing, “fair trade,” etc. positions. This in addition to his strong support of the coal industry may bring PA into the red column too (but I do agree that NY is a long shot for any Republican presidential candidate, including Trump).
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.