While I don't agree with everything Cruz has come out and stood for, I greatly respect a politician who's actually not afraid to speak out for and against popular issues that pertain to his party. The issue is that he's seen as a mega-conservative and won't get enough support from the middle or other swing voters to get elected. Sadly, as of right now, he's probably got the best chance of being elected because he's got the best chance to actually mobilize the party and get people excited about being republican voters again. Christie is just an idiot and Bush running would be an absolute snoozer.
I like the way you think, Thejamal. You seem to think very logically. I don't see Christie or Bush exciting the Republican base at all. The Republicans need to go witha strong conservative this time around and let the chips fall where they may. I'm tired of losing with boring moderate candidates who don't stand for anything.
One problem that is obvious to me is that many (probably a small majority of) Americans don't agree entirely or even at all with the traditional conservative social issues. More and more people who are NOT liberals are not religious or don't consider it important either way - the danger of Muslim fanatics aside, of course. Some people agree largely or completely with conservative fiscal policies, a strong national defense, small govt, adherence to the Constitution, etc. But many of these people get turned off when religion is brought in or when a politician takes a strong stance against gay marriage or abortion. The Repubs need to motivate voters without alienating them. Like it or not, it's basically a popularity contest. It's about getting enough people to agree with you enough or even just like you enough to vote for you. Pissing too many off or otherwise turning too many off will work against you. I've heard Mark Levin arguing and screaming and shouting down potential Republican swing voters because he disagreed with something they were telling him, such as them wanting to leave religion out of politics. Levin should realize that you get voters to come over to your side by convincing them your way is better than the other side's - NOT by shouting them down and trying to "win the argument" and turn them off in the process. Repubs should hammer and hammer away at all those things the majority believe are wrong with the current admin, the Dems in general, and the direction of the country in general. They should adopt a philosophy IMO that those divisive issues are "up to the individual" and basically not really talked about IMO. Dems beat Repubs all the time because the latter "take the high road" and don't respond to the formers' mud-slinging that is repeated and repeated by the MSM to the point where most people believe it. The former also win by changing the subject to religion, abortion, or gay marriage when the debate starts off being about the bad economy, excess taxes and regulations, the corruption and scandals of the current admin and the Dems' support of them, etc. The demographic in the country has been shifting, the media is biased, and the Dems are better at campaigning than the Repubs. This needs to change.
I'm a big fan of Mark Levin. He's right on the big stuff. But he does tend to make some goofy decisions in terms of what candidates he promotes and how he labels anyone that disagrees with him on one or two issues as a RINO. I do think Republicans need to get better at how they present themselves, JR Ewing. I don't think they should abandon the social issues. They just need to market themselves better, and focus more on issues where they know they have a support of the majority of the American people.
I'm not sure if Ted Cruz can't legally run for POTUS. He was born in Canada. His father is was born in Cuba. His mother was born in the United States. I thought the rule was that if you aren't physically born in the US, both of your parents had to be US citizens which is why birthers go after Obama certificate ad nauseam. He actually had dual citizenship, Canada and the United States, until he recently renounced his Canadian citizenship. I don't understand how he didn't know that because he has to get a copy of his birth certificate from Canada. How does a lawyer who graduated from Harvard not know that? I just can't take him seriously. My sister was born in Germany because my family was stationed there. She knows that she has dual citizenship.
He's a United States citizen. He's eligible to run because his mother was an American citizen. I'm glad he revoked his Canadian citizenship. Whats important to me areh is positions and leadership qualities. I think he's right on the money with both. He's extremely intelligent and articulate. He stands on his principles through thick and thin and doesn't ever waver. I'm a big fan of his, obviously.
I do not know him but I must admire that he is willing to put himself out there to vie for the most powerful office in the land. Taking the first step is a sign of being a winner and I hope that people support him to get where he needs to.
Being a citizen doesn't make you eligible to run for POTUS, you also need to be born on American soil. Hence the shenanigans with Obama's birthplace at the time and also why Governor Schwarzenegger couldn't go any higher, governor is the highest office you can reach if you were born outside of America.
Exactly, that is the case of Schwarzenegger, he couldn't run because he was born in Austria, so if Cruz is Canadian he can't run too.
No, you don't. John McCain wasn't born on America soil either. He was clearly eligible to run for president. Arnold Schwarzenegger immigrated to America. He wasn't born here nor were his parents America citizens. That's why he wasn't eligible to be president. Ted Cruz clearly is. No serious thinker says otherwise. It's a pretty cut and dry case. Not a lot of controversy, legally.
