Quarter of Republicans think Cruz's birthplace disqualifies him for president: poll

[HAPPY2BME]

A quarter of Republicans think White House hopeful Ted Cruz is disqualified to serve as U.S. president because he was born in Canada to an American mother, a new Reuters/Ipsos poll found.

Republican voters nearly mirror independents and the broader electorate in their belief that Cruz cannot hold the White House, with 27 percent of all voters and 28 percent of independents responding he should be disqualified.

Cruz, a U.S. Senator from Texas who was born to a U.S. citizen mother and Cuban father in Calgary, Alberta, has brushed aside the attacks about his eligibility as pure politics. But the questions could hamper his ability to rally the broad Republican support he would need to win the party's nomination to run for the presidency in November's election.

Only 47 percent of all voters surveyed responded that they thought Cruz is qualified to be president with regard to his citizenship, with 26 percent saying they were not sure.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-cruz-idUSMTZSAPEC1FZTL1SD

[HAPPY2BME]

I told you the 'window of opportunity' for Cruz was less than 24 hours.

That was about 18 hours ago ..

[truth_seeker]

You cannot place yourself on the All-Star Team.

Just because Cruz says it is so, and he is a brilliant Constitutional Expert, etc. etc. does NOT make it so.

First, there is NO legal precedent. We have NEVER had a President born outside the US.

Therefore his legal theory and claim, is no more than that.

He is also finished, in my lay opinion.

[HAPPY2BME]

You cannot place yourself on the All-Star Team.

Just because Cruz says it is so, and he is a brilliant Constitutional Expert, etc. etc. does NOT make it so.

First, there is NO legal precedent. We have NEVER had a President born outside the US.

Therefore his legal theory and claim, is no more than that.

He is also finished, in my lay opinion.

=================================

Hear the silence?

That's Ted Cruz not saying a word.

[ABX]

If he goes the distance, I'm sure you'll see something like this before the general.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/sres511/text

[jmyrlefuller]

You cannot place yourself on the All-Star Team.

Just because Cruz says it is so, and he is a brilliant Constitutional Expert, etc. etc. does NOT make it so.

First, there is NO legal precedent. We have NEVER had a President born outside the US.

Therefore his legal theory and claim, is no more than that.

He is also finished, in my lay opinion.

He was born a citizen. Do we have to dig out Webster's dictionary to explain those terms? There's no "claim," no "legal theory," it is established fact that he was born a citizen of the United States. Residency at birth is sufficient but not necessary under the law. The 25% of people who believe he is ineligible are wrong.

[ABX]

=================================

Hear the silence?

That's Ted Cruz not saying a word.

He did say something last night, however, in general, it is probably a smart move. For the general citizen hearing about this, the first thing they will think of is the Obama conspiracy theorists and all the stuff around that. Then they'll Google the issue and a vast majority of the top links will be to fringe blogs or they'll find things like this top ranking Google result on a much more authoritative source.
http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

Those people are going to put more credit in Harvard Law review far more than they will Orly's blog.

It is best to just let the ether fight it out until necessary.

[HonestJohn]

He did say something last night, however, in general, it is probably a smart move. For the general citizen hearing about this, the first thing they will think of is the Obama conspiracy theorists and all the stuff around that. Then they'll Google the issue and a vast majority of the top links will be to fringe blogs or they'll find things like this top ranking Google result on NBC written when the issue came up w/ Obama and McCain.
http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

Those people are going to put more credit in Harvard Law review far more than they will Orly's blog.

It is best to just let the ether fight it out until necessary.

I'm not so sure about that.  You're right on the issue, but since when has that stopped people from believing in quackery?  Just look at the anti-vaccination crowd; the more information you provide, the more they reject it and reinforce their own beliefs.

[ABX]

I'm not so sure about that.  You're right on the issue, but since when has that stopped people from believing in quackery?  Just look at the anti-vaccination crowd; the more information you provide, the more they reject it and reinforce their own beliefs.

But you are never going to win those people over so why try? It is getting into the weeds.

[HonestJohn]

But you are never going to win those people over so why try? It is getting into the weeds.

You keep trying so to minimize the number of new followers.  For silence tends to equal consent.  And consent will just channel more people toward those beliefs.

[EdinVA]

A friend just sent me an email about the Convention of States thing and it reference the Annotated Constitution, which I had never heard of, so I googled it and just sorta browsed thru it to see what it was.
Evidently, the politicians use this to figure out issues, so I looked up Qualification to be President.

Clause 5. No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citi-
zen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Con-
stitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall
any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have at-
tained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been Fourteen Years
a Resident within the United States.

QUALIFICATIONS
All Presidents from Martin Van Buren on were born in the United
States subsequent to the Declaration of Independence. The princi-
pal issue with regard to the qualifications set out in this clause is
whether a child born abroad of American parents is “a naturalborn
citizen” in the sense of the clause. Such a child is a citizen as a
consequence of statute.

Whatever the term “natural born” means,
it no doubt does not include a person who is “naturalized.” Thus,
the answer to the question might be seen to turn on the interpreta-
tion of the first sentence of the first section of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment, providing that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United
States” are citizens.

Significantly, however, Congress, in which a
number of Framers sat, provided in the Naturalization act of 1790
that “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born
beyond the sea, . . . shall be considered as
natural born citizens
. . . .”

This phrasing followed the literal terms of British stat-
utes, beginning in 1350, under which persons born abroad, whose
parents were both British subjects, would enjoy the same rights of
inheritance as those born in England[/b]; beginning with laws in 1709
and 1731, these statutes expressly provided that such persons were
natural-born subjects of the crown.

There is reason to believe,
therefore, that the phrase includes persons who become citizens at
birth by statute because of their status in being born abroad of Ameri-
can citizens.

Whether the Supreme Court would decide the issue
should it ever arise in a “case or controversy”—as well as how it
might decide it—can only be speculated about.

Link to Annotated Constitution index
https://www.congress.gov/constitution-annotated

Link to Annotated Constitution Section 5 President (qualifications begins on page 453)
https://www.congress.gov/content/conan/pdf/GPO-CONAN-REV-2014-9-3.pdf

[Right_in_Virginia]

He was born a citizen. Do we have to dig out Webster's dictionary to explain those terms? There's no "claim," no "legal theory," it is established fact that he was born a citizen of the United States. Residency at birth is sufficient but not necessary under the law. The 25% of people who believe he is ineligible are wrong.

No one is questioning whether or not Ted Cruz is an American citizen.  Thanks to his mother's citizenship and an act of Congress, Ted Cruz is a naturalized American citizen.

The question is whether or not a naturalized American citizen meets the unique (and brilliant) requirements established for one public office and one public office only:  The POTUS & CIC.

[HAPPY2BME]

No one is questioning whether or not Ted Cruz is an American citizen.  Thanks to his mother's citizenship and an act of Congress, Ted Cruz is a naturalized American citizen.

The question is whether or not a naturalized American citizen meets the unique (and brilliant) requirements established for one public office and one public office only:  The POTUS & CIC.

======================================

I wish this crap would just go away and the REAL ISSUES would take center stage.

As BigUn has stated, nothing will come of it (except more distraction).

What I am saying is that Cruz had better put up or shut up if he wants to stay in the race.  Those advising him to 'lay low' on this don't understand what the other foot falling is going to sound like.

IMO, Republicans don't want to have anything to do with any GOP candidate who has any sort of any whiff or smell of being ineligible to be POTUS base on citizenship - especially after the past eight years of Obama.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I wish this crap would just go away and the REAL ISSUES would take center stage.

Hey, Happy, this IS a real issue.  And it has precious little to do with Rafael Cruz. 

Here is the situation Rafael Cruz finds himself in:

Rafael Cruz born:  Canada,  Mother:  born: USA, Father: Born  Cuba, Canadian citizenship at time of Rafael's birth and for 30 years until 2005:   
Rafael Cruz:  A naturalized US Citizen by virtue of his mother's citizenship and an act of Congress.
Meets the "natural born citizen" eligibility to be POTUS and CIC:  Happy2BeMe votes "yes"

Here is the situation Human XYZ finds himself in:

Human XYZ  born:  Iran;  Mother: born USA, Father:  Born Iran, Iranian citizenship at the time of Human XYZ's birth and until 10 years prior to his son's candidacy for the POTUS.
Human XYZ:   A naturalized US Citizen by virtue of his mother's citizenship and an act of Congress.
Meets the "natural born citizen" eligibility requirement to be POTUS and CIC:    See "Rafael Cruz"

Get the problem, Happy?  Please, get the problem.

[HAPPY2BME]

Hey, Happy, this IS a real issue.  And it has precious little to do with Rafael Cruz. 

Here is the situation Rafael Cruz finds himself in:

Rafael Cruz born:  Canada,  Mother:  born: USA, Father: Born  Cuba, Canadian citizenship at time of Rafael's birth and for 30 years until 2005:   
Rafael Cruz:  A naturalized US Citizen by virtue of his mother's citizenship and an act of Congress.
Meets the "natural born citizen" eligibility to be POTUS and CIC:  Happy2BeMe votes "yes"

Here is the situation Human XYZ finds himself in:

Human XYZ  born:  Iran;  Mother: born USA, Father:  Born Iran, Iranian citizenship at the time of Human XYZ's birth and until 10 years prior to his son's candidacy for the POTUS.
Human XYZ:   A naturalized US Citizen by virtue of his mother's citizenship and an act of Congress.
Meets the "natural born citizen" eligibility requirement to be POTUS and CIC:    See "Rafael Cruz"

Get the problem, Happy?  Please, get the problem.

============================================

It IS a real issue, but as others have pointed out, it is an issue that stands 99.9% chance of being completely buried.

I don't think the Democrats will chase it because they are romancing the illegal alien Mexican vote - which is comprised of ... ILLEGAL ALIENS.  So throwing the spotlight on CITIZENSHIP right now isn't going to make them much coin in that voting pool.

Ditto the Republicans.  John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have made it 'perfectly clear' they are also romancing the Mexican vote.  Even though they are NOT going to get it (the Mexican vote), they have themselves (Boehner now passing the amnesty baton to his good buddy Paul Ryan) and the majority of the Republicans believing them, or at least too afraid to challenge them on it - ESPECIALLY DURING THE ELECTION CYCLE, when something could actually be done about it.

Cruz is not 'squeaky clean' himself, but I'll take what I can get, which doesn't look like its going to be much at the rate the Republicans are (once again) rendering their platform into a fist fight of who can whip the other's ass in time to debate Hillary Clinton.