Donald Trump falls to 2nd place in new national poll

[NeverSure]

Democrats don't get it yet. Everywhere Trump goes he draws record crowds. Debates that he was in drew record viewership. He's renting large venues that hold tens of thousands of people and even then they have to turn thousands away. His Facebook and Twitter pages are living organisms. Some well known pundits also have pages that are wild and alive.

He has enough energy for ten people. The morning after the SC voting he appeared (on Sunday) on 4 different national talk shows on different networks. Yes they do it by remote and yes the networks cooperate setting up the studio right where he is and he appears split-screen, but he spent all morning appearing, speaking and answering questions. I would have been too tired to get up and take a shower. This guy has been all over the South giving interviews and making speeches before large crowds and studio audiences. He's on the go constantly.

When the time comes he's going to pull a lot of democrats - even union workers - who are tired of having wages undermined by illegals, and are tired of having their jobs shipped to China and Mexico, and are tired of unrestrained immigration where in many places those people can get a driver's license and vote. These are issues for the middle class which is not comprised only of whites but includes legal Hispanics and blacks.

I've never seen people as blind as are this year's Democrats. They are standing in the face of a tsunami.

Cheers.

[NeverSure]

I forgot to mention voter turnout. Republicans are setting records for voter participation while Democrat participation is way down. Democrats are apathetic while Republicans are engaged. This of course bodes very poorly for Democrats in the general election. How would one get excited about a Hillary or Sanders???

SPARTANBURG, S.C, Washington Times. — "Republicans’ turnout streak continued, with GOP voters shattering their South Carolina primary record Saturday night.

With almost all precincts reporting, more than 737,000 votes had been counted. That was more than 20 percent higher than 2012, when about 603,000 voted.

It follows record GOP turnout in Iowa’s caucuses and New Hampshire’s primary earlier this month.

By contrast, Democrats’ turnout has tumbled from its 2008 records in all three contests, including Saturday’s caucuses in Nevada. About 80,000 voters took part in the caucuses, which was 33 percent less than 2008’s level."

Rest of story

[balo]

Donald Trump in the new 'Back to the Future' movie 2015

[NeverSure]

332

[NovaBlue05]

The Vatican is the most exclusive club on the planet. I actually don't recall seeing a black man there, and I've spent several days there. I suspect you'd have to be Catholic to live there. I'm glad I'm not but rather visited as a tourist. I did see an incredible fortune in artwork not to mention the elaborate architecture.

Blah...

You're bored, you want to read the biggest bullshit on this forum?

It Enough to spot the flaming posts Never Sure.

That doesn't look like the Vatican to me. It was probably taken in an African country. Look at the modern aluminum anodized door frames. No such thing in the Vatican.

So, your point beyond flaming was...???

Ghana, I believe

[Publicus]

I'm a 60 year old American. I've watched a good number of US Presidential Elections (12) up close..

Here are some things to think about:

1. In the 2012 popular vote (which legally does not matter very much, based on the US Electoral College system), Obama beat Romney by just under 4% - 51.1% to 47.2% https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012

2. In primary elections so far this cycle, Republican voter turnout has consistently set records, while Democratic voter turnout has consistently been lower than in the last couple of election cycles. I'm not going to go look it up - but I will propose that Republican turnout in 2016 has thus far been up 15% from 2012, and Democratic turnout has been down 10% from 2012. IF THIS PATTERN HOLDS for the 2016 general election, and IF ROUTINE PARTY LINE VOTING DOMINATES, then - applying these incremental multipliers times the 2012 election results yields a pretty comfortable victory for the Republican candidate - whoever he is.

3. Now - in primaries, most voters come out to vote FOR someone. In the November General Election, there is more of a tendency for some voters to go out, hold their noses, and vote for someone that they don't particularly like - so as to vote AGAINST an opposing candidate that they ABSOLUTELY ABHOR.

4. Despite what the pundits claim, the spectrum right now is roughly:

Cruz at far right, Rubio at center right, Trump at just right of center, Clinton a bit left of left center, and Sanders out in orbit somewhere.

All of these people have supporters, and some of them have rabidly animated opponents in either the opposite camp, or even their own party.

No Cruz supporters will EVER vote for Hillary. No Hillary supporters will EVER vote for Cruz. Many Republicans will NEVER vote for Trump - but I have not heard of any of these anti-Trump Republican voters who will defect to Clinton, if she is the Democratic nominee. They may stay home on election day, but they won't defect. I HAVE heard of a significant number of Democratic voters who will never vote for Clinton, have no use for Sanders, and have climbed on board the Trump bandwagon.

I haven't got a clue who Sanders' supporters will gravitate to, when he is pushed out by the corrupt Democrat Party process (if you want to see what I mean, take a look at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_vote_count.html and then at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_delegate_count.html) . My guess is - after Sanders gets destroyed by that corrupt process, at least half of a VERY large population of Sanders supporters will refuse to support Clinton - and they will either stay home, or vote for the Republican candidate. Now (important question) - which Republican candidate would 3,000,000 anti-Clinton, former Sanders supporters be most likely to be willing to vote for? My guess is: Trump could pull in 90% of these, Rubio might pull in 50%, and Cruz might (if he;'s lucky) bring in 15%.

If Cruz is eliminated, initially, 70% of his supporters will stay home. 25% might go to Rubio, 5% to Trump. But - if Cinton is the Democratic candidate, half the initial stay-at-homes will go vote for whoever is the Republican candidate - just to block Clinton.

If Rubio is eliminated. 30% will initially stay home, 20% might go to Cruz, 20% might go to Trump, 30% might go to Clinton.

If Trump is eliminated, 20% might go to Cruz, 20% might go to Rubio, 30% will vote third party, 30% will stay home

5. Remember something about all polls you read now: The pollsters are not paying much attention to voters who are not "for" anybody, but who would be motivated to go out and vote ":against" someone, regardless of who the opponent is. A fairly large population of both Democrats and Republicans will actively vote for ANYBODY to keep Clinton from becoming President. There is also a significant population from both parties who strongly oppose Trump - but of these, I think that not may will vote for Clinton, if she is the opponent. They will either vote third party, or stay home.

6. All things considered, I suspect that the November election will be between Trump and Clinton - and Trump will win. That would normally scare me - but seeing as how the country managed to survive eight years of Obama with only 50% of its national power/morale/prosperity/respect/economy/freedom destroyed, it can surely survive Trump clumsily trying to get the train-wreck back on the rails.

Cheers!

MS

You grossly misjudge and thereby wrongly address the number of Hispanics, Asian Americans and blacks who will sprint to the polling stations along with whites sternly opposed to Trump or any Republican in the general election. You also ignore the suburban Republican women who are appalled by Trump and will in fact vote for the D to be sure they stop Trump or Cruz. Elections of potus are decided in the suburbs, places such as suburban Philadelphia that gives the state to the D candidate, suburban Denver that put Colorado in the D column, suburban Tampa-St Pete and suburban Orlando etc that give FL to the D's, suburban Albequerque that tilt New Mexico to the D's and and the suburbs of several cities in Ohio that put that swing state in the D column.

Reagan chose GHW Bush as vp in 1980 to calm and eventually win the white anti-war moderate centrist suburban Republican women across the land to lessen Reagan's rough and tough rightist hawkishness and it was a successful strategic decision by RR and his top advisors. It was highly successful in the end cause over the weekend before the Tuesday election those women made their decision and it was to vote for Reagan/Bush --the two of 'em together. It was significant in blowing Carter away.

You forget or don't know the Democratic party Electoral College base of the past six elections of potus starts at 251 each and every time with 270 EV's to win. GW Bush won in 2000 with 272 EV's and in 2004 with 286. Trump as the nominee would win 12 to 15 states, which is well short of even 200 EV's. This is why the Republican Establishment is frantic, to include looking at losing the Senate again.

Yes this is a bizarre potus election year but Blue states aren't going over to any Republican -- not any Republican -- while some certain Red states won't be able to support Trump, such as North Carolina (which Obama won in 2008 but not in 2012) or Missouri which votes R for potus by about 3000 votes each time and will vote D by 6000 if Trump is the nominee (MO has a woman D US Senator, Calire McCaskill now in her 2nd term and a D governor in his own 2nd term, named Nixon of all things). Don't be surprised to see a potus Red state such as Montana go Blue against Trump as they don't relate to his message or his style.

Youse guyz over on the right will retain a state such as Idaho which averages 67% for the R in potus elections, along with such states as South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and the like. After those states and a few other deep Red ones, youse guyz is sunk. Face it. My first vote for potus wuz Hubert Humphrey and I've worked this stuff a long time back in the States. Your view of potus elections over a long haul is respected but it is off the mark in this one.

[Publicus]

It appears that Ben Carson and John Kasich had better stay in the race. A constitutional law professor is now insisting that neither Cruz nor Rubio are eligible to be president. Neither are natural born citizens. Where were these experts when Obama was running for president. According to them, Obama is not a natural born citizen either.

-snip- Carson, I think no chance, but I can see he can take some of the Cruz religious fanatic votes if Cruz has to exit.

Trump won 66% of the Evangelical vote just now in SC. The only two Evangelicals in the race are Cruz and Carson. Cruz thought that this was his firewall across the South but it sure doesn't look that way. He thought super Tuesday would pull him ahead due to this but he's in for a shock. All demographics want Trump to go kick ass in DC an no other candidate gets it.

For those speculating on who voters would turn to if lessers drop out, it will be Trump. He won every single demographic in SC - women, young and old people, blacks, Hispanics, Christians, - every single one.

This is an unprecedented revolution against the power base on both sides, so just sit back and watch.

Cheers.

South Carolina has not voted for a Democrat for potus since Jimmy Carter in 1976 only.

Do try to contain the hysteria of projecting one solid Red state to the entire electorate of the United States.

http://www.270towin.com/states/South_Carolina

[NovaBlue05]

Well.....I'm not convinced Trump will win the nomination yet but I have been wrong many times before so I might be singing a different tune after Super Tuesday.

[NeverSure]

Trump won 66% of the Evangelical vote just now in SC. The only two Evangelicals in the race are Cruz and Carson. Cruz thought that this was his firewall across the South but it sure doesn't look that way. He thought super Tuesday would pull him ahead due to this but he's in for a shock. All demographics want Trump to go kick ass in DC an no other candidate gets it.

For those speculating on who voters would turn to if lessers drop out, it will be Trump. He won every single demographic in SC - women, young and old people, blacks, Hispanics, Christians, - every single one.

This is an unprecedented revolution against the power base on both sides, so just sit back and watch.

Cheers.

South Carolina has not voted for a Democrat for potus since Jimmy Carter in 1976 only.

Do try to contain the hysteria of projecting one solid Red state to the entire electorate of the United States.

http://www.270towin.com/states/South_Carolina

Thank you for reminding me that only SC has Evangelicals, blacks, Hispanics, women, young people, old people, etc. in its demographics. Thank you for reminding me that other states don't have a middle class that's tired of seeing its jobs shipped to China and Mexico. Thank you for reminding me that there are no Democrats in other states who are sick of illegal immigration.

I need you to come along once in a while and set me straight. BTW you're not a Brit or Aussie, so you'll have no problem correctly pronouncing "President Trump".

332

[Publicus]

 

Trump won 66% of the Evangelical vote just now in SC. The only two Evangelicals in the race are Cruz and Carson. Cruz thought that this was his firewall across the South but it sure doesn't look that way. He thought super Tuesday would pull him ahead due to this but he's in for a shock. All demographics want Trump to go kick ass in DC an no other candidate gets it.

For those speculating on who voters would turn to if lessers drop out, it will be Trump. He won every single demographic in SC - women, young and old people, blacks, Hispanics, Christians, - every single one.

This is an unprecedented revolution against the power base on both sides, so just sit back and watch.

Cheers.

South Carolina has not voted for a Democrat for potus since Jimmy Carter in 1976 only.

Do try to contain the hysteria of projecting one solid Red state to the entire electorate of the United States.

http://www.270towin.com/states/South_Carolina

Thank you for reminding me that only SC has Evangelicals, blacks, Hispanics, women, young people, old people, etc. in its demographics. Thank you for reminding me that other states don't have a middle class that's tired of seeing its jobs shipped to China and Mexico. Thank you for reminding me that there are no Democrats in other states who are sick of illegal immigration.

I need you to come along once in a while and set me straight. BTW you're not a Brit or Aussie, so you'll have no problem correctly pronouncing "President Trump".

332

Your welcome cause that's what friends are for, to remind us of our oversights. I read your posts all the time to help me stay on my own game thx.

The right needs to be reminded that I've identified the states and the limited number and kind of states a Trump would win in the November election. They are where the evangelicals dominate the voting along with the teabaggers and the racialists or the cowboys and the rednecks and the whingenuts along with the rest of the Republican base constituency. That is all that I have done.

The R constituency continues to be present in Virginia for instance but they are no longer dominant in elections, as Barack Obama in 2008 won VA for the Democratic party potus for the first time since 1964; and again in 2012. VA rightwhingers et al will vote in full force in November but VA the state will vote for HRC for potus. She'll win VA by 3 percentage points, if not 5 percent. A bunch of Virginia millennials have come to maturity instead of another whole generation of only 19th century Confederates frozen in time and petrified in thought.

Look at VA and Idaho. VA with its 13 Electoral College votes is voting Democratic after a long tradition of voting R. Idaho still votes R and by more than any Red state, 67% R and gives all of its 4 EC votes to the R. That is the R problem in elections of potus. With the exception of Texas, which has 28 Electoral College votes, the R for potus gets a slew of states but they have 3 EC votes, or 5, or 6 EC votes. It's also why the Democrat for potus has won the popular vote 5 of the last 6 elections, to include Al Gore in 2000 (thank you Governor Jeb and bye bye for good to you and your election day miserable family).

CA = 55 EC votes for the D for potus

NY = 29 EC votes for the D

Florida = 29 for the D

Pennsylvania = 20 for the D

Illinois = 20 for the D

Michigan = 16 for the D

New Jersey = 14 for the D

Ohio 18 for the D

Virginia 13 D

Washington State = 12 D

Massachusetts 11 D

And the beat goes on with the EV and the popular vote for the Democrat for potus in the quadrennial election in populous states with big EC votes.

Deep Red state Wyoming on the other hand has its 3 (three) EC votes. The R for potus wins a lot of states but spins his wheels getting 3 from North Dakota and 6 from Utah and 5 from Nebraska, 5 from West Virginia, 7 from Oklahoma etc etc. Evangelicals and teabaggers and rightwhingenuts et al.

Game over.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Publicus

[Jingthing]

Can Americans stop the horribly offensive demagogue, Donald Trump?

Or will he slip into power, like other demagogues in other times in other countries?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/moment-of-truth-we-must-stop-trump/2016/02/21/0172e788-d8a7-11e5-925f-1d10062cc82d_story.html

The moment of truth: We must stop Trump


Trump is rising by taking advantage of a divided country. The truth is that the vast majority of voting Americans think that Trump is unacceptable as a presidential candidate, but we are split by strong partisan ideologies and cannot coordinate a solution to stop him. Similarly, a significant part of voting Republicans think that Trump is unacceptable, but they too, thus far, have been unable to coordinate a solution. Trump is exploiting the fact that we cannot unite across our ideological divides.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Jingthing

[NeverSure]

Here is only part of how the Democrats lost the White House in 2016.

Washington Examiner, 2/22/2016.

Almost 90,000 dangerous illegal immigrants go free.

Nearly 60 percent of illegal immigrants identified by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as criminal threats are not deported and are eventually released, the latest example of the Obama administration's failed immigration policy.

Internal ICE figures show that in fiscal 2015, the agency encountered 152,393 illegal immigrants labeled a criminal threat, mostly in jails, but charged 64,116. About another 88,000 were not processed for deportation, according to the Center for Immigration Studies' Jessica Vaughan.

The numbers are even worse for those who ICE asks local police and sheriffs to detain but never collect.

Rest of Story.

Cheers.

332

Edited February 22, 2016 by NeverSure

[NeverSure]

Can Americans stop the horribly offensive demagogue, Donald Trump?

No.

Cheers.

332

[slipperylobster]

Polls have a margin of error. a 2 percent difference between candidates is still no indication of who would win.

[NeverSure]

Insiders: Trump has peaked

The majority of Republican insiders say The Donald has hit his ceiling, while gleeful Democrats say he’s not going anywhere.

LINK

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

By Politico - 07/24/15

[Jingthing]

If it was a one on one race, Trump vs. Rubio or Trump vs. Kasich, Trump wouldn't get the nomination. But the way it's playing out, he is now the probable republican nominee.

[NovaBlue05]

Insiders: Trump has peaked

The majority of Republican insiders say The Donald has hit his ceiling, while gleeful Democrats say he’s not going anywhere.

LINK

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

By Politico - 07/24/15

Yep...The "Republican insiders" have certainly been on tops of things with respect to Trump so far so who can argue with their logic now.

[lannarebirth]

It appears that Ben Carson and John Kasich had better stay in the race. A constitutional law professor is now insisting that neither Cruz nor Rubio are eligible to be president. Neither are natural born citizens. Where were these experts when Obama was running for president. According to them, Obama is not a natural born citizen either.

I don't think one has to be a Constitutional law scholar to understand that "natural born" is synonymous with "native born". As in, born within the geographical confines of the US of A. That, or within the confines of a US administered area somewhere outside the US. If you're born inside a US consulate or military base somewhere outside the US, I think that probably qualifies as "native born". I can't think of any other circumstance of birth that would.

[Publicus]

Here is only part of how the Democrats lost the White House in 2016.

Washington Examiner, 2/22/2016.

Almost 90,000 dangerous illegal immigrants go free.

Nearly 60 percent of illegal immigrants identified by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as criminal threats are not deported and are eventually released, the latest example of the Obama administration's failed immigration policy.

Internal ICE figures show that in fiscal 2015, the agency encountered 152,393 illegal immigrants labeled a criminal threat, mostly in jails, but charged 64,116. About another 88,000 were not processed for deportation, according to the Center for Immigration Studies' Jessica Vaughan.

The numbers are even worse for those who ICE asks local police and sheriffs to detain but never collect.

Rest of Story.

Cheers.

332

the Obama administration's failed immigration policy

We need equally if not moreso to speak of the Republican Congress' failed immigration policy.

The Democratic controlled Senate passed an immigration bill the House under Speaker John Bohner (remember him) declined to consider. It is a Republican ruse that the Senate never sent the bill to the House, a ridiculous claim.

As usual, there is plenty of blame to apportion between Democrats and Republicans, the tea party Republican members of the House number one.

Donald Trump, the noted immigration reformer, wall builder and catcher of Mexican rapists, is btw 5 percentage points behind Cruz in the Texas primary race which means he's catching Cruz too. Cruz loses his own (borrowed) state to Trump and Cruz is toast.

Trump is leading in Florida too but now that Bush is out of the race Rubio should be able to assemble a win there. If Rubio can't win in his home state, which also means to finally win in at least one state, he'd show himself to be the little enchilada he is. A Trump gulp if The Donald pulls through in FL too.

The Rube needs to win a state cause he ain't done it yet. His 3-2-1 strategy of 3rd in Iowa, 2nd in NH and 1st in SC is one of the great laffers of the Republican campaign to date. It shows a weak unrealistic and frankly silly strategy in the Rubio campaign. It reminds us that Marco still looks like the up tight and self conscious high school junior class president who everyone knows will grow up some day to become mature. Still waiting on that one also.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Publicus

[NeverSure]

If it was a one on one race, Trump vs. Rubio or Trump vs. Kasich, Trump wouldn't get the nomination. But the way it's playing out, he is now the probable republican nominee.

No way. If for instance Cruz dropped out, most of his votes would go to Trump and Trump would win bigger. Cruz (with Carson) is the avowed evangelical in the race but Trump took 66% of that vote in SC. Cruz was counting on it.

Many people have counted on many things in this race that haven't come true. The one thing you can count on is that Trump is unstoppable.

Cheers.

332

[boomerangutang]

Here's the Donald on Climate Change:

"With the coldest winter ever recorded, with snow setting record levels up and down the coast, the Nobel committee should take the Nobel Prize back from Al Gore"

So, he's not only the greatest businessman with 4+ bankruptcies, he's also smarter than hundreds of climate scientists. .....and shows his mean streak yet again - towards Gore this time. More recently, he blamed Bush Jr. for 9-11 ("it was on his watch."). He's the type of bully that thinks by denigrating everyone around him (except those who adulate him) he makes himself bigger and wiser. Note to Trump: having an entourage doesn't make a person great and wise. Mike Tyson and Idi Amin had entourages also.

[Publicus]

If it was a one on one race, Trump vs. Rubio or Trump vs. Kasich, Trump wouldn't get the nomination. But the way it's playing out, he is now the probable republican nominee.

No way. If for instance Cruz dropped out, most of his votes would go to Trump and Trump would win bigger. Cruz (with Carson) is the avowed evangelical in the race but Trump took 66% of that vote in SC. Cruz was counting on it.

Many people have counted on many things in this race that haven't come true. The one thing you can count on is that Trump is unstoppable.

Cheers.

332

Nobody I know is trying to stop Trump.

Send him through to the November election....please.

And by all means.

Republican wipeout day.

[boomerangutang]

Trump to Jeb, during the most recent debate.........

"The World Trade Center came down during your brother's reign, remember that."

Boomer's comment: If that's not a low blow, I don't know what is. Heck, Pearl Harbor was attacked while FDR was prez, are we going to blame PH on FDR? Trump would. The Donald is a combination of ignorance + meanness + superiority-complex. I can think of other leaders with those 3 drawbacks: Stalin, Chairman Mao, Idi Amin, Bokassa, Papa Doc, Thaksin, Marcos, Sukarno, .......now we can add Trump to that list.

The best thing a Trump presidency would bring, is Trump showing up each morning trying to spin the gaffes he made the day before - to make them to sound less offensive. Every day he makes vindictive, racist, angry, unwise remarks. ....and that's a person who could have his finger on the nuclear button.

Edited February 23, 2016 by boomerangutang

[khwaibah]

GO TRUMP GO.

[khwaibah]

GO TRUMP GO.

[boomerangutang]

GO TRUMP GO.

If I found myself adding my voice to 'go Trump go!' I'd have to add, "Fall America, fall."

However, on the other side of the coin, Trump as the Republican candidate will ensure another Democratic victory in November, so, from that perspective, I'll chime in, "Go Trump Go!"

P.S. I just heard a Sarah Palin speech. She was trying to be poetic. Who here recalls the Roadrunner cartoons? Ms Palin is like Wiley Coyote after he slams into another cliff face, with stars and squiggles swirling around his head.

Edited February 23, 2016 by boomerangutang

[Gary A]

A short video for liberals;

[lannarebirth]

GO TRUMP GO.

If I found myself adding my voice to 'go Trump go!' I'd have to add, "Fall America, fall."

However, on the other side of the coin, Trump as the Republican candidate will ensure another Democratic victory in November, so, from that perspective, I'll chime in, "Go Trump Go!"

P.S. I just heard a Sarah Palin speech. She was trying to be poetic. Who here recalls the Roadrunner cartoons? Ms Palin is like Wiley Coyote after he slams into another cliff face, with stars and squiggles swirling around his head.

I'm no fan of Trump, but I've got to ask you. When's the last time you've been back to America? The Democrats you so clearly embrace are now the party of the rich. Every major city you go to is filled with Democrats and... homeless people. You say "Fall America, fall"? Well that's already happened and it happened when Democrats became Republicans starting with Bill Clinton. Republicans are much better at being Republicans than are Democrats. Democrats really screw it up and the country in the process.

If one is a Democrat vote for Bernie Sanders. Don't even think about Hillary Clinton as she is the worst kind of Republican, vicious, un fair, and still spends all the money and more.

[keemapoot]

92 year old Bob Dole just endorsed Rubio, but qualified it by saying that if Trump were to win the nomination, he would be glad to act as consultant to Trump's administration. Not sure how much consulting you can do at 92 though....

It seems even the establishment Repubs are hedging their bets now.

**looks like he just picked up Orrin Hatch, too, along with some others. Looks like the establishment is lining up behind the apprentice Rubio now with Bush out, I guess as expected.

Edited February 23, 2016 by keemapoot

[vaultdweller0013]

It appears that Ben Carson and John Kasich had better stay in the race. A constitutional law professor is now insisting that neither Cruz nor Rubio are eligible to be president. Neither are natural born citizens. Where were these experts when Obama was running for president. According to them, Obama is not a natural born citizen either.

I don't think one has to be a Constitutional law scholar to understand that "natural born" is synonymous with "native born". As in, born within the geographical confines of the US of A. That, or within the confines of a US administered area somewhere outside the US. If you're born inside a US consulate or military base somewhere outside the US, I think that probably qualifies as "native born". I can't think of any other circumstance of birth that would.

If they meant native born, they would have said native born.

Shortly after writing the constitution, many of the same people in the first congress defined "natural born" in the Naturalization Act of 1790:

It also provided for citizenship for the children of U.S. citizens born abroad, but specified that the right of citizenship did "not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States." It specifies that such children "shall be considered as natural born citizens," the only US statute ever to use the term.

(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790)

This law is no longer in effect, but the Supreme Court uses the laws enacted by the first Congress to understand the meaning of the constitution.

Although it has never been definitively settled by the Supreme Court, and despite what some scholars may argue, the term natural born almost certainly refers to someone who was a US citizen either through being born in the US or through having at least 1 US citizen parent.

Edited February 23, 2016 by vaultdweller0013