Trump, Cruz go at each other in Republican debate

[NeverSure]

Funny New York Daily News cover about Cruz's New York values blunder:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/new-york-daily-news-ted-cruz_56989bc4e4b0778f46f8f078?

Hey, Cruz: You don't like N.Y. values? Go back to Canada!

It says a lot about Trump that despite his years of doing biz with lots of people including the press and city hall, that he hasn't made a lot of enemies in NYC. He appears to be quite well respected. Even his many employees don't trash him but rather seem to support him.

[NeverSure]

The bromance is over!

Pick your poison, republicans.

Your next "poison" is Trump who will be the next POTUS. I'm not the biggest fan of Trump, but the others suck the big one so bad... It's the lesser of several evils and I'm sick of the DC insiders myself. Hillary is bad news in that regard and she can't even hold a comfortable lead over Sanders the communist. Another Bush? Please...

Cruz with Canadian values and Rubio with Cuban values and some worn out hacks like Christi and Santorum and Huckabee? US Congress approval ratings are in the gutter and Obama ain't all that either.

People are sick of same ole and you're going to see a Trump.

Cheers.

Edited January 17, 2016 by NeverSure

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been removed.

[Jingthing]

SNL nails Cruz on the New York values thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doJauc_5I6c&feature=youtu.be

[Jingthing]

An interesting analysis of the core brand for Trump: AUTHORITARIANISM!

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533

In fact, I’ve found a single statistically significant variable predicts whether a voter supports Trump—and it’s not race, income or education levels: It’s authoritarianism.

...


Authoritarianism is not a new, untested concept in the American electorate. Since the rise of Nazi Germany, it has been one of the most widely studied ideas in social science. While its causes are still debated, the political behavior of authoritarians is not. Authoritarians obey. They rally to and follow strong leaders. And they respond aggressively to outsiders, especially when they feel threatened. From pledging to “make America great again” by building a wall on the border to promising to close mosques and ban Muslims from visiting the United States, Trump is playing directly to authoritarian inclinations.

I've been saying this for a while now.

Trump may not be scary, but his SUPPORTERS sure are!

Especially interesting thing about this article is it's assertion that there are plenty of DEMOCRATS who are pro-authoritarian as well. Uh oh.

[Usernames]

SNL nails Cruz on the New York values thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doJauc_5I6c&feature=youtu.be

The video has been pulled from youtube.

[Jingthing]

Okie Dokie.

[Publicus]

Constitution says to be eligible for public office, elective office first and foremost, one needs to be a citizen.

Constitution also states to be eligible to be POTUS one needs to be a "natural born citizen." This seems to state an obvious and conscious difference.

So says another law professor from Harvard, Einer Elhauge, who is expert in Constitutional law. The distinction here is to be born on the soil of the United States (which includes its territories or possessions).

All it will take is one secretary of one of the 50 states to determine on his/her own Constitutional oath and authority that Ted Cruz does not qualify to be on the ballot in the state. Each of the 50 states has a secretary of the state in charge of all elections who executes all the election laws of the state in accordance with the State constitution and the US Constitution. Most state secretaries are directly elected and therefore not subject to being ordered around by other state officials to include a governor.

Cruz will have to challenge this in federal court, for sure. How can anyone claim to be a true POTUS without being on the ballot in each of the 50 states (and District of Columbia). If it occurs in more than one state then Cruz has a problem compounded.

Trump is an idiot but he notably saves himself by being dumb like a fox. Trump has no mind for public policy or public policy making, diplomacy, military or civil public affairs, and so much more required of even a citizen, but he's is mentally agile enough to always be a couple of steps ahead of the next guy. Cunning is another word among many.

The current field of numbnuts Republican candidates was his 2015 Christmas gift from heaven.

[thaibeachlovers]

Constitution says to be eligible for public office, elective office first and foremost, one needs to be a citizen.

Constitution also states to be eligible to be POTUS one needs to be a "natural born citizen." This seems to state an obvious and conscious difference.

So says another law professor from Harvard, Einer Elhauge, who is expert in Constitutional law. The distinction here is to be born on the soil of the United States (which includes its territories or possessions).

All it will take is one secretary of one of the 50 states to determine on his/her own Constitutional oath and authority that Ted Cruz does not qualify to be on the ballot in the state. Each of the 50 states has a secretary of the state in charge of all elections who executes all the election laws of the state in accordance with the State constitution and the US Constitution. Most state secretaries are directly elected and therefore not subject to being ordered around by other state officials to include a governor.

Cruz will have to challenge this in federal court, for sure. How can anyone claim to be a true POTUS without being on the ballot in each of the 50 states (and District of Columbia). If it occurs in more than one state then Cruz has a problem compounded.

Trump is an idiot but he notably saves himself by being dumb like a fox. Trump has no mind for public policy or public policy making, diplomacy, military or civil public affairs, and so much more required of even a citizen, but he's is mentally agile enough to always be a couple of steps ahead of the next guy. Cunning is another word among many.

The current field of numbnuts Republican candidates was his 2015 Christmas gift from heaven.

So you are saying that if a US diplomat's wife has a child in a foreign country, the child is not eligible to be a presidential candidate when it grows up, though born of two US citizens?

Seems nutso to me.

Edited January 23, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[Publicus]

Constitution says to be eligible for public office, elective office first and foremost, one needs to be a citizen.

Constitution also states to be eligible to be POTUS one needs to be a "natural born citizen." This seems to state an obvious and conscious difference.

So says another law professor from Harvard, Einer Elhauge, who is expert in Constitutional law. The distinction here is to be born on the soil of the United States (which includes its territories or possessions).

All it will take is one secretary of one of the 50 states to determine on his/her own Constitutional oath and authority that Ted Cruz does not qualify to be on the ballot in the state. Each of the 50 states has a secretary of the state in charge of all elections who executes all the election laws of the state in accordance with the State constitution and the US Constitution. Most state secretaries are directly elected and therefore not subject to being ordered around by other state officials to include a governor.

Cruz will have to challenge this in federal court, for sure. How can anyone claim to be a true POTUS without being on the ballot in each of the 50 states (and District of Columbia). If it occurs in more than one state then Cruz has a problem compounded.

Trump is an idiot but he notably saves himself by being dumb like a fox. Trump has no mind for public policy or public policy making, diplomacy, military or civil public affairs, and so much more required of even a citizen, but he's is mentally agile enough to always be a couple of steps ahead of the next guy. Cunning is another word among many.

The current field of numbnuts Republican candidates was his 2015 Christmas gift from heaven.

So you are saying that if a US diplomat's wife has a child in a foreign country, the child is not eligible to be a presidential candidate when it grows up, though born of two US citizens?

Seems nutso to me.

The contention is that Cruz would have had to have been born on a US Embassy or Consulate Office ground or possession, or, as was the instance of John McCain, in a US territory (Panama Canal Zone of the time).

Romney's father born in Mexico ran for POTUS without a challenge to his eligibility, but most people attribute it to his not getting far enough into the campaigning process for a challenge to come forward. Willard Mitt Romney was born in the USA by that birth name.

A Congressional Research Service report published in November comes closest to answering that question.

"There have been legitimate legal issues raised concerning those born outside of the country to U.S. citizens," the report states. "The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term 'natural born' citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship 'by birth' or 'at birth,' either by being born 'in' the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship 'at birth.'"

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/how-mitt-romneys-mexican-born-father-was-eligible-to-be-president/

Still outstanding however, the CRS analysis says "parents" as in plural and then says "citizen parents." And the CRS analysis has the final phrase, "or by being born in other situations" that meet legal requirements. Yet, a number of Constitutional experts say Congress has no authority to interpret the Constitution by passing laws to say what the Constitution says. That only SCOTUS has that authority and remit.

There is no question Cruz is vulnerable on this question and the polling shows it.

Edited January 23, 2016 by Publicus