Harris, Haley, and Ramaswamy Cannot Be President

The Post Email ^ | August 29, 2023 | Don Frederick

[Dilbert San Diego]

But someone such as Vivek is not a naturalized citizen.

Some Freepers say that there are two main classes to citizens, those being natural born,or those who are naturalized. If you didn’t have to be naturalized to be a citizen, then that makes you natural born .

[JayGalt]

That proves nothing just as the fraudulent election proves nothing.

[Boogieman]

True, someone would have to file a suit, and it would almost certainly have to be against a presidential or vice-presidential candidate, since those are the only cases where the distinction between “natural born citizen” and just plain “citizen” really comes into play.

But also, the suit would have to be filed by someone who has standing, and can demonstate actual harm. So I guess maybe the second place contender that loses to a candidate might be able to do it, for they could argue that, if the law was applied properly, they would have won the race, so they have actually been harmed by misapplication of the law.

I wouldn’t wager much money on the courts wanting to take such a case though.

[Macho MAGA Man]

(Is Arnold a US citizen? Then yeah. He could be president.)

Wrong! He is not eligible.

[Seruzawa]

Wait. You’re saying if we don’t agree with you God will punish us? Begone. We don’t need totalitarians here in. You obviously want the conservatives to lose resulting in a totalitarian murder state. I think you are the one who needs to worry about God.

[Clutch Martin]

“didnt the founding fathers exempt themselves because they did not meet the nbc requirement?”

I see... They were all born in a British colony, none of them qualified with that logic. Is that from the Federalist papers?

[al baby]

That ship sailed in 08

[JimRed]

That ship sailed on 1/20/09.

[Boogieman]

Even Arnold doesn’t agree with that.

[pfflier]

Well, I was born in Washington DC (Bolling AFB). Am I not a natural born citizen either?

[Responsibility2nd]

That proves nothing just as the fraudulent election proves nothing.

 

A so called fraudulent election gave us 8 years of Barack Obama. You call that nothing? Again, I plead with you NBC people - come back to reality.

[Boogieman]

You think the 3/5s compromise was pro-slavery? Have you been listening to the 1619 project or something?

[kenmcg]

Who is going to stop them?

[pierrem15]

True if both parents were not citizens at the time of birth.

But also irrelevant, as is most of the Constitution under the current regime.

What we need is someone with both the understanding and the will to do what is necessary to clean house. Even Trump strikes me as too much of a choir boy to do that, too infused with 1960s civic lessons who doesn't realize that his political enemies need to be destroyed before they destroy him and finish off what's left of the American republic.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Good question. You were born in a district, not a state.

[Responsibility2nd]

I stand with the founders original intent. Do you?

________________________________________

No. And I told you why. They may have had good intentions, but they screwed up.

[Responsibility2nd]

Have you been listening to the 1619 project or something?

_________________________________________

Obviously not. Since I don’t know what the 1619 project is.

[Boogieman]

“But someone such as Vivek is not a naturalized citizen.”

Yes, but what I mean is that to say, essentially, “if someone doesn’t have allegiance to a foreign country, they must be natural born” is a bad argument. Since we already have a ready example at hand of people who don’t (or at who have sworn not to) have allegiance to a foreign country who are definitely not natural born, and that is the naturalized citizens.

“Some Freepers say that there are two main classes to citizens, those being natural born,or those who are naturalized.”

Yes, but that’s a slightly different argument. If there are 2 classes, then “not A” must equal B. That’s sound (if the premise is correct, and you can’t be a member of both).

The variation based on whether they have allegiance is more like: If there are two classes, and a third condition, to say “A doesn’t have this condition, therefore, if you don’t have this condition, you must be in class A” is a fallacious argument if anyone can demonstrate that even one member of class B also doesn’t have that condition.

[mmichaels1970]

If you are born here, regardless of where your parents were born you are a natural born citizen of the USA and therefore eligible to be POTUS.

The source article makes a convincing argument against that premise. Consider the following: Two diplomats from Russia are serving in the Russian Embassy in DC. They "bump their Russkie uglies" and nine months later head over to the hospital in DC to give birth to 8lb 2oz baby Boris. Is Boris a natural born citizen and therefore able to run for President when he's 35? Or is he not?

Like I said, earlier, how many of the first few Presidents were not only born here but both their parents were born here. I don’t really know but I doubt very many.

This is a moot point. As the Constitution specifically exempts people who were "citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution" as was explained in the article. Didn't matter where you were born prior to the Constitution. As long as you were a citizen when it was adopted, you were good.

I remember this coming up with John McCain, he wasn’t born in the USA, he was born in Panama, but both his parents were born here, therefore he could be POTUS.

Agreed. And because both of McCain's parents were citizens, McCain would be eligible. This would be the opposite of the Russian theoretical above. Two Americans do the deed in another country, their kid is a citizen even if born in that country.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Good point. What are the chances of the federal courts getting involved?