The Evil Genius Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 White nationalists robocalling for Trump http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/White-nationalists-robocalling-for-Trump-6751047.php A white nationalist super PAC robocalled registered voters in Iowa urging them to turn out for Donald Trump in the 2016 election. Talking Points Memo said the voice on the call that rang Iowan households Saturday belongs to Jared Taylor, founder of the white supremacist magazine American Renaissance. "I urge you to vote for Donald Trump because he is the one candidate who points out that we should accept immigrants who are good for America," Taylor said. "We don't need Muslims. We need smart, well-educated white people who will assimilate to our culture. Vote Trump." Taylor's was not the only voice on the call, however. The Rev. Donald Tan, host of a Christian talk show, is heard quoting the Bible while stumping for Trump. "First Corinthians states 'God chose the foolish things of this world to shame the wise and God chose the weak things of this world to shame the strong,'" he said. "For the Iowa caucuses please support Donald Trump." American Freedom Party chairman William Johnson, who calls himself "a farmer and white nationalist" finishes the message, noting that the call was not authorized by Trump. Johnson founded the American National Super PAC, which paid for the phone campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 If it somehow became a battle of the extremes... say a Cruz v Sanders race... I wonder what happens? Who wins or does a third party actually make headway because the two mainstream parties put forth their fringes? If it's Trump, I see the Republicans pinching their noses and all falling in line, you can see them trying to do that already and trying to reconcile that it could be Trump. Right now, I think he still stands as the most likely choice... and frankly, maybe even the most palatable (I suppose Rubio might be slightly saner, but can't have Predicto win his sig bet) If Hillary falls twice after being the presumptive twice it would be quite the upset. Losing to a Sanders might even be crazier than losing to an Obama. I don't see the latter happening though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 White nationalists robocalling for Trump http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/White-nationalists-robocalling-for-Trump-6751047.php Wow, I wonder if they're just calling certain households or as many people as possible. Because that seems like the sort of thing that might backfire. Then again, when it comes to Trump it's best to assume otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Wow, I wonder if they're just calling certain households or as many people as possible. Because that seems like the sort of thing that might backfire. Then again, when it comes to Trump it's best to assume otherwise. Except that a lot of these ________________'s think that everyone else (or at least all good Americans) secretly believe what they do. They're just too PC and cowardly to say it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Interesting article by a law scholar. He's saying that if you're an "originalist" as far as interpreting the Constitution (which I think Cruz claims to be), then Ted Cruz isn't a "natural born citizen" and can't be president. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-lee-is-ted-cruz-eligible-to-be-president-20160110-story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Interesting article by a law scholar. He's saying that if you're an "originalist" as far as interpreting the Constitution (which I think Cruz claims to be), then Ted Cruz isn't a "natural born citizen" and can't be president. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-lee-is-ted-cruz-eligible-to-be-president-20160110-story.html cute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 It's interesting that Cruz says it's settled law, because the Supreme Court has never actually ruled directly on it, and he would know that. I think, deep down, he knows it's not settled, but obviously he has to say it's settled because Trump is going HAM with it, and any weakness will be exploited both by Trump, and the media playing off of Trump. I doubt it really becomes a major issue, but it's definitely not truly settled law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 oh god i am so rooting for a birther episode where Cruz is the focus. oh it would just be so delightful, as someone not attached to either party, watching everyone trip over each other trying to switch sides at the same time on the argument. i'll officially give up on caring and just eat popcorn and watch. god it would be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 It's interesting that Cruz says it's settled law, because the Supreme Court has never actually ruled directly on it, and he would know that. I think, deep down, he knows it's not settled, but obviously he has to say it's settled because Trump is going HAM with it, and any weakness will be exploited both by Trump, and the media playing off of Trump. I doubt it really becomes a major issue, but it's definitely not truly settled law. Settled law means the interpretation is widely accepted and there is legal precedents which support the interpretations being represented. Problem is all that is meaningless if the supreme court decides to take up the issue. Also I don't think you have to go all the way back to the 1700's to come up with a contrary opinion on Cruiz. Growing up in the 1960's I was always taught in school you had to be born in the US to become President here and that Natural Born was not the same as Born a Citizen. Now it's possible my elementary school teacher was wrong.. but she was right about most of the other stuff. Anyway to my mind the accepted interpretation of the law changed in the mid 1970's when Lowell P. Weicker was seriously discussed for the VP nomination on the GOP Ticket. Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. also ran for president in 1980. Born in Paris to am American father working for a private company and to a British Mother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Wow, I wonder if they're just calling certain households or as many people as possible. Because that seems like the sort of thing that might backfire. Then again, when it comes to Trump it's best to assume otherwise. I dunno. Me, I think it makes me feel better about humanity, if I assume that this is a false flag thing, being run by somebody to smear Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 I wish you could actually tie this to voting records because i think there's a ton of moderates or independents that's voting record says otherwise, but we can't instead we have to live with this: Politico - Gallup: Share of Democrats reaches record low May also be easy to write off as a sensational headline because those saying they identify as republicans is just 1% above record lows... but remember the narrative is supposed to be that the GOP is losing supporters and will continue to because of changing demographics. this doesn't really support that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 oh god i am so rooting for a birther episode where Cruz is the focus. oh it would just be so delightful, as someone not attached to either party, watching everyone trip over each other trying to switch sides at the same time on the argument. Everyone won't. A lot of folks knew it was stupid, for Obama, and it's stupid, for Cruz. but remember the narrative is supposed to be that the GOP is losing supporters and will continue to because of changing demographics. this doesn't really support that... No, "percentage identifying as" doesn't support that narrative. But "percent voting for" does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 I dunno. Me, I think it makes me feel better about humanity, if I assume that this is a false flag thing, being run by somebody to smear Trump. Yeah this election is like we are all patrons of a freak show.. We're drinking beer walking from exhibit to exhibit and saying... That's freaky... it's not real.. but that's really freaky... Ok that's freakier. Owwww.. look at that one over there... Slurp, wipes mouth on sleeve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Interesting article by a law scholar. He's saying that if you're an "originalist" as far as interpreting the Constitution (which I think Cruz claims to be), then Ted Cruz isn't a "natural born citizen" and can't be president. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-lee-is-ted-cruz-eligible-to-be-president-20160110-story.html I disagree with him, but then again I think virtually all "originalist" arguments are dumb as hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Everyone won't. A lot of folks knew it was stupid, for Obama, and it's stupid, for Cruz. you have much more faith in people than i do. No, "percentage identifying as" doesn't support that narrative. But "percent voting for" does. yeah, that's why i wish we could tie voting records to these "independents". though i don't know if the outcome of clinton vs trump is going to support the claims that will be (and usually are by whoever wins whatever election) made about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 It's interesting that Cruz says it's settled law, because the Supreme Court has never actually ruled directly on it, and he would know that. I think, deep down, he knows it's not settled, but obviously he has to say it's settled because Trump is going HAM with it, and any weakness will be exploited both by Trump, and the media playing off of Trump. I doubt it really becomes a major issue, but it's definitely not truly settled law. The supreme court doesn't have to rule on something for it to be settled law. The supreme court doesn't rule on lots of legal arguments, because lots of legal arguments are *stupid* legal arguments. If you were a US citizen on the day you were born, you are a natural born citizen. Any other argument is a dumb argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 I disagree with him, but then again I think virtually all "originalist" arguments are dumb as hell. Oh, I assume virtually all "originalist" arguments consist of "I claim that the FFs agree with me". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Also I don't think you have to go all the way back to the 1700's to come up with a contrary opinion on Cruiz. Growing up in the 1960's I was always taught in school you had to be born in the US to become President here and that Natural Born was not the same as Born a Citizen. Now it's possible my elementary school teacher was wrong.. but she was right about most of the other stuff. She was wrong if she said that, but I doubt you were taught anything of the sort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 though i don't know if the outcome of clinton vs trump is going to support the claims that will be (and usually are by whoever wins whatever election) made about it. Oh, that's a tradition. Every election, no matter how narrow, is a sweeping mandate to enact the agenda that I didn't tell people about, because I knew it would cost me votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 She was wrong if she said that, but I doubt you were taught anything of the sort. I was taught the same in school, though a bit more recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 She was wrong if she said that, but I doubt you were taught anything of the sort. That (you have to be born in the US) is what I was taught. In high school. In Fairfax County. And I even think it's correct. Just overly simplified. The lesson was probably along the lines of "You have to be born in the US. As opposed to being naturalized." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 I disagree with him, but then again I think virtually all "originalist" arguments are dumb as hell. That's really not the point though.. the point is some folks believe Ted Cruz is the biggest unprincipled self promoting ignoramus on the planet. We's also believe he's arguable one of the smartest guys in any room he walks into... So you know he's not going to withdrawl from the race and exclaim himself inelligable. We all know what he's going to do here. We just really want to hear him explain it to us to see if he's really as smart as we all suspect him of being. Lord knows he doesn't show off his intellect when he's hanging around his regular anti intellectual political Myrmidons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 I wonder how many people on the right would vote for Bernie over Cruz or Trump, assuming Bernie doesn't have some health issue pop up during the run up that takes him out of the race. Me. But then again, admitting that may now exclude me from being part of "the right." I told my wife about 6 months ago that if it's Trump vs. Hillary, I'll vote 3rd party. If it's Trump vs. Sanders, I'll vote for Sanders. And I've never even considered voting for Cruz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Me. But then again, admitting that may now exclude me from being part of "the right." Heck, it excludes you from being American. (According to the Right.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 If you were a US citizen on the day you were born, you are a natural born citizen. Any other argument is a dumb argument. Yeah I disagree with that. in the 14th amendment when the Constitution says "all people born" here are citizens, however; In article 2 section 1 clause 5 they use an entirely different expression to describe the criteria to be president.. "Natural born". To me it's clear the constitution differentiates between Born and Natural Born. I agree with you that it's settled law, I just disagree intelligent people can't disagree.. Besides I want to make Cruz squirm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.