English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I am a Republican, and I say no, despite the fact that I like Arnold. I think it opens up a kettle of worms that we do not need to open.

2007-07-25 09:19:49 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

20 answers

No. It is clearly prohibited in the Constitution.

2007-07-25 09:24:28 · answer #1 · answered by Brian 7 · 3 2

It may be time for this Clause of the constitution to be Changed. For example, if an American happened to be born overseas (e.g. a child of military family stationed overseas) they are ineligible for the presidency. But person born here, raised elsewhere but has lived only a total of 14 years in the US is eligible.

But I would still like to insure 'American-ness' in some way. So rather than doing away with it, I would say to change it:

Native Born Citizen OR Naturalized citizen for at least 20 years.
resided in the US at least 20 years

2007-07-25 16:38:37 · answer #2 · answered by jehen 7 · 0 0

I think you are right it will open up a huge problem someday if we do this now. I don't like Arnold but even if it did change he would never make it through the Republican primaries, many Republicans in California are not happy with him and that is the most liberal state for Republicans to be right now.

2007-07-25 16:23:27 · answer #3 · answered by ALASPADA 6 · 3 0

I like Arnold and I am a moderate Republican.
but

"NO"

to non-born US citizens being eligible for President.
That would open a can of worms!!!

2007-07-25 18:51:29 · answer #4 · answered by John Olson 1 · 0 0

I like Arnold, but I don't think we need to amend the constitution, so that he can run for President. There should never be question of a President's allegiances.

2007-07-25 16:23:39 · answer #5 · answered by Big D 4 · 3 0

I think they should be able to run for president. What would our country be, if not for the immigrants who originally came to our country? Those who come could over here might be a great addition to our society. You might want to take the easy road and not "open the can of worms", but I believe in the goodness of humans and that anyone can make a difference. I hate to break it to you, but Americans arn't the only ones with good ideas, these "aliens" are just as good as us, if not better.

2007-07-25 16:28:02 · answer #6 · answered by Dr. Moprah 2 · 0 1

No. I like Arnold as an actor, and don't know much about him as a politician. But I am going to say no. If we let foreigners become eligible for our presidency, then we are only one rigged election away from losing control. **shudder**

2007-07-25 16:24:57 · answer #7 · answered by McCoy 2 · 1 0

No we shouldn't. I like Arnold too but I like him better in California! There was a reason for putting this in the constitution and it should stay there.

2007-07-25 16:30:53 · answer #8 · answered by question212 6 · 0 0

Tampering with the constitution to benefit one individual is never a good idea. It was designed to make it very difficult to amend in order to prevent such ridiculous, passion of the moment, rationales from altering it's original principles and intent.

I say nein.

2007-07-25 16:24:32 · answer #9 · answered by douglas l 5 · 1 0

I say no. We cannot trust a candidate who is from another country. His loyalty could still be to him homeland. That would especially be true of the Chinese. China has great leverage over their citizens who have immigrated to the US. We don't need a Manchurian Candidate.

2007-07-25 16:25:30 · answer #10 · answered by Shane 7 · 2 0

All men are created equal and this is the Land of Oportunity.
Just not the land to be oportunistic at the expense of others.
Answer: Down with that idea......

2007-07-27 01:02:18 · answer #11 · answered by 7 Habits 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers