From the early debate (AKA the one with Carly Fiorina), Fox News's Bill Hemmer: "One year from now, a Republican nominee will be standing on this stage in this very same arena. That person is in Cleveland today."
From the main-event debate, Bret Baier: "Less than a year from now, in this very arena, one of these 10 candidates or one of the seven on the previous debate tonight will accept the Republican party's nomination."
It may be quite likely that the GOP nominee will be one of the individuals that stood last night on the glaring, makeshift stage of (the ridiculously named) Quicken Loans Arena. But it's not a fact. No one know what events will occur in the next year, changing the issues and the needs of the nation and the health and life of the candidates. And the largeness of the number 17 does not ensure that there will not be 18 or 20 or 30.
I know there's that other Fox show, "American Idol," where they bring out a bunch of pop singers and (try to) excite us with the announcement that one of them will be the next American Idol. There, it's true. The rules of the contest preclude new entrants. There can be no substitutions. This is your choice, America.
But the presidential election doesn't work that way. We had a whole bunch of characters — in 2 batches — on the stage last night. But you can have a large number of options and still not like any of them enough to keep you from wanting to go looking elsewhere.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
18 comments:
It used to be Gund Arena. Quicken Loans Arena (or as we locals call it, the Q) is a big improvement.
Is it still a possibility that the Convention revolts and nominates someone other than the Establishment's Choice?
The first 20 minutes, starting at 8:50, were so bad, I could not make myself watch. I admit it. I have a very low tolerance for actually watching this crap. So, I missed it.
And I take back my criticism of Althouse for her criticism of Fox.
Cruz Rubio and Jindal are not eligible natural born Citizens and should not have been in the debates. So the debates are illegitimate to begin with.
Even the State Dept. has a directive that doubts Cruz' eligibility
7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency
(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)
a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural-born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
b. Section 1, Article II, of the Constitution states, in relevant part that “No Person except a natural born Citizen...shall be eligible for the Office of President.”
c. The Constitution does not define "natural born". The “Act to establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization”, enacted March 26, 1790, (1 Stat. 103,104) provided that, “...the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born ... out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.”
d. This statute is no longer operative, however, and its formula is not included in modern nationality statutes. In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.
In August 2013 the State Dept. quietly added a directive claiming that citizens naturalized by 8 US Code 1401 are "not considered naturalized". Even though 8 US Code 1401 was clearly enacted by Congressional power to enect uniform rules of naturalization, and even though Rubio, Cruz and Jindal would not have even been onsidered citizens before 1898 (Cruz before 1922--Cable Act). The state Dept reasons that "naturalization" means the "conference of citizenship AFTER BIRTH by any means whatsoever". This is a distinction w/o a difference, since those naturalized by 8 US Code 1401 are indeed naturalized AFTER BIRTH (not in the womb or birth canal) by the statute itself (any means whatsoever). They were preparing for the candidacy of Rubio, Cruz and Jindal. Their candidacy is meant to whitewash the Usurpation that has already occurred with Hussein Obama, who was also, at best, if his birth story is true, naturalized by 8 US Code 1401.
7 FAM 1131.6-3 Not Citizens by “Naturalization”
(CT:CON-474; 08-19-2013)
Section 101(a)(23) INA (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(23)) provides that the term "naturalization" means "the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever." Persons who acquire U.S. citizenship at birth by birth abroad to a U.S. citizen parent or parents who meet the applicable statutory transmission requirements are not considered citizens by naturalization.
Fox did not cover itself with glory last night. Too much like a high school pep rally. I watched a few segments.
While it's technically true that another Republican candidate could enter the race and win the nomination, practically speaking that's not likely.
What well-known, or not so well-known Republian, is out there who could swoop in right now and take the nomination away from the 17 announced candidates? Go ahead, name a name.
Can't think of one.
Quicken Loans paid big money for the naming rights. Camp Randall Stadium can be Althouse Field for $100m.
Last night was teriffic political theater. All the candidates at both debates came off well. Carly was a standout. Bush seemed shaky and "the Donald" was just what you'd expect. Baier, Wallace and Kelly asked some tough questions and hopefully set the paradigm for all future debates with Republicans and Democrats.
Althouse contends the future Republican candidate was not necessarily on the stage last night.
I agree.
If Mitt Romney had walked out onto that stage last night the reception would have been electrifying and there would be no doubt who was presidential and who the Republican candidate should be.
Wow. How long has it been since Mick has haunted the realm? How did all those lawsuits against BHO go, Mick? I remember you saying you were going to have him removed from office.
The Republicans have fielded a group of qualified individuals any of which would do a better job than Obama. All the democrats come up with is Hillary and maybe Biden if Hillary implodes, which is likely. Apparently, nothing the Conservatives can come up with would ever be good enough for the smug elitists basking in their own self-bestowed brilliance. Trump represents what a goodly portion of the body politic believe, that being we are tired of the status quo, business as usual, pseudo intellectualism and machine politics. Political Correctness is on the firing line. as well it should be.
"Trump represents what a goodly portion of the body politic believe, that being we are tired of . . . pseudo intellectualism"
Funny stuff.
Scott M said...
"Wow. How long has it been since Mick has haunted the realm? How did all those lawsuits against BHO go, Mick? I remember you saying you were going to have him removed from office".
The Judiciary is captured as much as any other branch of .gov. I watched them explicitly lie right before my eyes. Then they shut me down at the appellate level by not offering an opinion at all ("per curiam affirmed"). You are asleep if you think that a court opinion means legitimacy--- just look at the recent Obamacare and "gay marriage" decisions.
I will be challenging Rubio Cruz and Jindal using a slightly different tactic, so go back to grazing in the fields, and let real men protect the Republic.
Before last night, I did not know that Governor Walker was losing his hair and had started a bad combover. Trump is doomed by that alone, as is Walker.
I know there's that other Fox show, "American Idol," where they bring out a bunch of pop singers and (try to) excite us with the announcement that one of them will be the next American Idol. There, it's true.
How so? They could all die in a fiery inferno on the first night of the competition. The show could change the rules. The Large Hadron Collider could tear a hole in the space-time continuum, ending the universe as we know it.
What is the probability threshold for saying something is non-factual?
What a waste of pixels this whole topic is. Semantic pedantry. And this from a guy who has argued passionately for the serial comma.
Yeah, technically there is a non-zero probability the Republican candidate wasn't at either debate, but that probability is probably well under 0.001 by now.
It was a FOX News media event - by, for, and about FOX News.
As Instapundit is noting, the moderators took near 1/3 of the air time. They framed questions to provoke ad-hominum attacks between candidates rather than address issues, and this at considerable cost of time. After asking a question, they pointlessly interrupted candidates just seconds into the candidates' response.
The whole thing was a FOX production to showcase the moderators. Fair enough, it's their show. It's their soap and their dick; they can wash it as long and as hard as they want. Now we know how Chris Wallace spends his time in the shower.
Just wait until the Miiler Brewing Company's contract runs out on Miller Park in 2020, Miss Prissy...
Post a Comment