kilroy69 1,271 Posted December 16, 2015 I still believe that in the end Rubio is selected as the candidate, Trump spins off as an independent and dooms the Republicans to lose to Clinton. You can stop there. If Rubio is selected it will not matter what trump does because he will never get the amount of votes needed to overtake hillary in a general election. Did you see the rally he held the other night where 10s of people showed up? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 651 Posted December 16, 2015 Any nominee other than Rubio or Jeb! and it will be a landslide for the Democrats of 1984 proportions. In 1984, Reagan got re-elected, the Dems gained 2 Senate seats, but lost 16 House seats Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted December 16, 2015 In 1984, Reagan got re-elected, the Dems gained 2 Senate seats, but lost 16 House seats Thanks professor. Mondale won one state. That's what will happen to the repubtards Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 651 Posted December 16, 2015 Thanks professor. Mondale won one state. That's what will happen to the repubtards The way one would normally read your post, the implication was that the Dems achieved some kind of landslide. Please re-word your statement for full credit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted December 16, 2015 The way one would normally read your post, the implication was that the Dems achieved some kind of landslide. Please re-word your statement for full credit. You seem to be the only one who had trouble with it. Please try harder. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 651 Posted December 16, 2015 You seem to be the only one who had trouble with it. Please try harder. Nah Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted December 16, 2015 The way one would normally read your post, the implication was that the Dems achieved some kind of landslide. Please re-word your statement for full credit. Seems to be a reading comprehension issue on your end Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
porkbutt 897 Posted December 16, 2015 hey look it's another lib circle jerk! hillary clinton :lol: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 5,506 Posted December 16, 2015 I don't. I think it will shift immensely once the dregs bail out and leave it as Trump Cruz Rubio and Jeb. I smell a Jeb Rubio ticket. Maybe a Rubio Kasich ticket One thing I learned from RP before he departed was that a Jeb-Rubio ticket is impossible as the Constitution bans people from the same state to be Pres and VP simultaniously. As for your greater point, I disagree. Combined, Trump, Cruz, Carson, and Fiorina hold 60+ % support. If Trump stumbles it'll be to Cruz. If this isn't decided before the convention, then things'll get really ugly and whoever comes out the winner will only have half the party behind them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 8,011 Posted December 16, 2015 Most punchable face in this election cycle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,576 Posted December 17, 2015 Most punchable face in this election cycle. without a doubt, I can't even look at this guys face. and I am a repub Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reality 3,124 Posted December 17, 2015 Great, more birthers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted February 16, 2016 Bump. Telling that no one ever even bothered to offer an explanation Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,174 Posted February 16, 2016 I'm not a Cruz supporter. But as point of fact wasnt his mom American? You said both were not on the OP? ETA: just looked it up, his mom was born in Delaware. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted February 16, 2016 I'm not a Cruz supporter. But as point of fact wasnt his mom American? You said both were not on the OP? ETA: just looked it up, his mom was born in Delaware. Yeah I had that wrong. Makes no difference as Barack's mom was American and he was actually born in the US but somehow he is DQ'd from being president while Ted Cruz is A-OK. Focking hypocrites and I note they won't even show their faces in here. Cowards too Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BunnysBastatrds 2,676 Posted February 16, 2016 He's a Fawking hack. Just like E. Warren. They should both die in a fiery wreck. The fact that either is relevant in today's polics are a black eye to all of us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 16, 2016 The birther argument is relevant to repubtards in much the same way he Constitution is: when it is convenient. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mungwater 601 Posted February 16, 2016 I just love how quick they'd say Barack Hussein Obama but never say Raphael Edward Cruz. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,174 Posted February 16, 2016 The birther argument is relevant to repubtards in much the same way he Constitution is: when it is convenient. I really wish people wouldn't stroke with such a broad brush when the louder minority of a group acts a certain way and label the entire group. Normally that's called the negative form of stereotyping. And the very same people who constantly whine about 'stereotyping' do this very same thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 16, 2016 The birther argument is relevant to repubtards in much the same way he Constitution is: when it is convenient.the Constitution you liberals hate and want activitist moonbat judges to destroy ? That one ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 16, 2016 I really wish people wouldn't stroke with such a broad brush when the louder minority of a group acts a certain way and label the entire group. Normally that's called the negative form of stereotyping. And the very same people who constantly whine about 'stereotyping' do this very same thing. Sorry The birther argument is relevant to the flat-earth society wing of repubtards in much the same way he Constitution is: when it is convenient. Better? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 16, 2016 Sorry The birther argument is relevant to the flat-earth society wing of repubtards in much the same way he Constitution is: when it is convenient. Better? same can be said for democrats, no ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
porkbutt 897 Posted February 16, 2016 same can be said for democrats, no ? of course it can. and now these libfocks are becoming birthers themselves before cruz is even nominated hilarity. hillary clinton and bernie sanders :lol: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 16, 2016 of course it can. and now these libfocks are becoming birthers themselves before cruz is even nominated hilarity. hillary clinton and bernie sanders :lol: Hillary makes a good Labrador Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kutulu 1,719 Posted February 16, 2016 Isn't trump the one bringing up the "eligible to run for president" question? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 16, 2016 of course it can. and now these libfocks are becoming birthers themselves before cruz is even nominated hilarity. hillary clinton and bernie sanders :lol: Trump's leading the birther charge dumbass And it was Cruz himself who was the birther in chief against Obummer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
porkbutt 897 Posted February 16, 2016 Trump's leading the birther charge dumbass And it was Cruz himself who was the birther in chief against Obummer trump's an idiot (who' still better than the leading dem candidates) and all the dems are eating it up across the innerwebs. . irony hilarity :cry: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 16, 2016 trump's an idiot (who' still better than the leading dem candidates) and all the dems are eating it up across the innerwebs. . irony hilarity :cry: You don't find it ironic that the birther in chief Raphael Cruz is now a birther target from within his own party? ... that's why it's funny. Do people really have to point this out to you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 16, 2016 You don't find it ironic that the birther in chief Raphael Cruz is now a birther target from within his own party? ... that's why it's funny. Do people really have to point this out to you?is Cruz withholding his birth certificate ? College records ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted February 16, 2016 trump's an idiot (who' still better than the leading dem candidates) and all the dems are eating it up across the innerwebs. . irony hilarity :cry: Nobody's eating it up you dumbass. I don't care where Cruz was born. There are many reasons in my mind why Cruz should not be president but his birthplace ain't one of them. I do care about the blatant hypocrisy from the racist birthers on the right touting conspiracy theories that Barack Hussein Obama must have been born outside of the United States, many of which said mouth breathers are now supporting a guy who actually, indisputably WAS born out of the United States. Difference is Obama is black and a liberal whereas Cruz is a white-enough über conservative. You focking dooshbag hypocrite Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 8,011 Posted February 16, 2016 Nobody's eating it up you dumbass. I don't care where Cruz was born. There are many reasons in my mind why Cruz should not be president but his birthplace ain't one of them. I do care about the blatant hypocrisy from the racist birthers on the right touting conspiracy theories that Barack Hussein Obama must have been born outside of the United States, many of which said mouth breathers are now supporting a guy who actually, indisputably WAS born out of the United States. Difference is Obama is black and a liberal whereas Cruz is a white-enough über conservative. You focking dooshbag hypocrite This is nothing new. McCain was born outside the US too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,174 Posted February 16, 2016 Difference is Obama is black and a liberal whereas Cruz is a white-enough über conservative. I don't think race played a part. It was and is a partisan thing for most 'birthers'. And its a dumbass thing for Donald Trump. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,174 Posted February 16, 2016 Well lets take the partisan out of it. To be honest I've never really given it much thought. After a cursory search (Wiki): Ted Cruz was born on December 22, 1970, at Foothills General Hospital inCalgary, Alberta, Canada, to parents Eleanor Elizabeth (Darragh) Wilson and Rafael Bienvenido Cruz. At the time of his birth, Cruz's parents had lived in Calgary for three years and were working in the oil business as owners of a seismic-data processing firm for oil drilling. Cruz has said, “I’m the son of two mathematicians/computer programmers. In 1974, his father left the family and moved to Texas. Later that same year, his parents reconciled and relocated to Houston. Cruz's father was born in Cuba, and his grandfather was from the Canary Islands inSpain. His mother was born in Wilmington, Delaware, and is three quarters of Irish descent and one quarter of Italian descent. His father left Cuba in 1957 to attend the University of Texas at Austin and obtained political asylum in the United States after his four-year student visa expired.[ Rafael Cruz earned Canadian citizenship in 1973 and ultimately became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2005. His mother earned an undergraduate degree in mathematics from Rice University in the 1950s. Eleanor and Rafael Cruz divorced in 1997. Section 1 Article II of the Constitution 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. So the argument is over what does "Natural Born Citizen" actually mean. John McCain was born on a U.S. Military Base in the Panama Canal. Being born on a US Military base to US parents is pretty straightforward in my opinion. Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. Hawaii became a US state in 1959. Pretty straight forward in my opinion. Ted Cruz's situation is actually the most questionable and murky. Most scholars I've seen are saying the most commonly accepted meaning of "Natural Born Citizen" applies to Cruz and he is in the clear as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
porkbutt 897 Posted February 16, 2016 Nobody's eating it up you dumbass. I don't care where Cruz was born. There are many reasons in my mind why Cruz should not be president but his birthplace ain't one of them. I do care about the blatant hypocrisy from the racist birthers on the right touting conspiracy theories that Barack Hussein Obama must have been born outside of the United States, many of which said mouth breathers are now supporting a guy who actually, indisputably WAS born out of the United States. Difference is Obama is black and a liberal whereas Cruz is a white-enough über conservative. You focking dooshbag hypocrite Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,174 Posted February 16, 2016 Something sort of interesting. How to interpret an old document like the Constitution. There are three leading theories of how to interpret the Constitution today. One is textualism: The Constitution means what its words say. The historical context of the words is important when a modern plain meaning is not self-evident. A second theory, adopted by many liberals, relies on a "living Constitution": the Constitution means what is most consistent with fundamental constitutional values as applied to present circumstances. The third theory, championed by many leading conservatives, is originalism: The Constitution means what ordinary people would have understood it to mean at the time it was ratified, in 1788. So the last way one reads the constituion (Originalism) would probably preclude Cruz form being President. So the following is interesting (at least to me). The kind of judge Cruz says he admires and would appoint to the Supreme Court is an 'originalist,' one who claims to be bound by the narrowly historical meaning of the Constitution's terms at the time of their adoption. To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn't be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and '90s required that someone actually be born on U.S. soil to be a 'natural born' citizen. Even having two U.S. parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive." So while most legal scholars think he's in the clear if Cruz himself was a judge of it, he'd have to rule against himself by the strict original meaning of the constitution. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 5,518 Posted February 16, 2016 I don't think race played a part. It was and is a partisan thing for most 'birthers'. And its a dumbass thing for Donald Trump. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted February 16, 2016 https://youtu.be/Ou4e3yCXYaA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted February 16, 2016 I don't think race played a part. It was and is a partisan thing for most 'birthers'. And its a dumbass thing for Donald Trump. You are dead wrong, the Birther movement was always predicated on race. If Obama were a white liberal born in Hawaii they sure would've hated him but it wouldn't have been based on some notion that he wasn't even American Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted February 16, 2016 Well lets take the partisan out of it. To be honest I've never really given it much thought. After a cursory search (Wiki): Section 1 Article II of the Constitution So the argument is over what does "Natural Born Citizen" actually mean. John McCain was born on a U.S. Military Base in the Panama Canal. Being born on a US Military base to US parents is pretty straightforward in my opinion. Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. Hawaii became a US state in 1959. Pretty straight forward in my opinion. Ted Cruz's situation is actually the most questionable and murky. Most scholars I've seen are saying the most commonly accepted meaning of "Natural Born Citizen" applies to Cruz and he is in the clear as well. And yet people like porkbutt, Gocolts and drobeski screams about Obama's supposedly not being a natural born citizen while not giving a damn about Cruz's status. Why is that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites