Current Events > People not born in the US can't run for President. Should that be changed?

(+) Yeah! (+)

What do you think? It seems like an old law that doesnt make sense anymore. Maybe make it where you need to live in the United States for 30 years? I dont know. A naturally born citizen just seems too extreme now a days

Heck no, it's bad enough that Americans get to.

Living in the US for long enough or through childhood is a decent alternative.

No.

It's an even greater conflict of interest than the people born here with corrupt interest.

Absolutely not. We're not even doing a good enough job of keeping KGB groomed politicians out of government as it is.
The last thing we need is to open the floodgates on it with some Saudi or CCP backed billionaire to spam our fucking airwaves with ads.

Avirosb posted...

Heck no, it's bad enough that Americans get to.

lol.

I'm not from the US, and here it's only about the citizenship (not where you were born), so I think this is somewhat stupid.

But changing it also sounds stupid, because these days it would only serv the "Musk for president!" crowd.

So, if there is a change it should be because the change itself is desired, and not for a specific person --> let it only affect people born after the change was made, and don't make uneligible people suddenly eligible.

Watch Boris Johnson become US president because Americans think he sounds smart.

Avirosb posted...

Watch Boris Johnson become US president because Americans think he sounds smart.

Compared to literally any Republican candidate . . .

I see your points. I didnt put too much thought into it. It would open the doors for dad more corruption. In my head I guess I thought it could get worse but it can ALWAYS get worse

A Saudi Prince could bribe his way in

We should make an exception for Canadians, since Canada is basically just "America Premium" anyway.

If they were brought/came here before the age of 10 and served on the military/navy/etc....for 25 years minimum then yes with the obvious clean record, etc....

ANort175 posted...

We should make an exception for Canadians, since Canada is basically just "America Premium" anyway.

Canada is just America but French

Irony posted...

Canada is just America but French

America Royale with Cheese

I think it should be changed. Different criteria would need to be implemented, but it is ridiculous that someone who moves here when they are 2 years old and only knows a life of living in America cannot run for President.

The_Popo posted...

I think it should be changed. Different criteria would need to be implemented, but it is ridiculous that someone who moves here when they are 2 years old and only knows a life of living in America cannot run for President.

Living here since 2 doesn't at all mean no ties to the country they were born.

If anything, it can help the facade.

NatsuSama posted...

Living here since 2 doesn't at all mean no ties to the country they were born.

If anything, it can help the facade.

Jesus Christ, did you just accuse toddlers of putting up a "facade"? Any ties formed at age two are the same as ties to people formed before you were born.

KI_Simpson posted...

Jesus Christ, did you just accuse toddlers of putting up a "facade"? Any ties formed at age two are the same as ties to people formed before you were born.

This can't be a serious post...

It shouldn't have to explained the absurdity of thinking just because you travel to a new country at a young age it doesn't magically sever all ties you have to the country you were born if nefarious parties are involved.

If a high ranking CCP or Russian official comes here at 2, coming here at 2 doesn't magically change that kid has connections to powerful people in a foreign adversary nation. Such a connection is security risk to America and that's just an example of a blatant connection.

NatsuSama posted...

This can't be a serious post...

It shouldn't have to explained the absurdity of thinking just because you travel to a new country at a young age it doesn't magically sever all ties you have to the country you were born if nefarious parties are involved.

You completely ignored my question about how this was different from the "nefarious parties" planning to use a child born in the new country.

I would abolish the presidency if it was up to me. The executive in the US is way too powerful and will likely enable a dictatorship at some point.

KI_Simpson posted...

You completely ignored my question about how this was different from the "nefarious parties" planning to use a child born in the new country.

I ignored it because no foreign adversary is going to openly announce their plan lol.

The bottom line is coming here at a young age does not magically mean you have no ties directly or indirectly to foreign adversaries that are a threat to the US.

NatsuSama posted...

I ignored it because no foreign adversary is going to openly announce their plan lol.

The bottom line is coming here at a young age does not magically mean you have no ties directly or indirectly to foreign adversaries that are a threat to the US.

You did not ignore it because of that, that is a completely random statement not in any way affiliated with what I said. I am giving you one last chance, explain why whatever you think "nefarious parties" are planning with a two year old can't be done by sending someone to a country with the instructions to have a child there.

No in opinion.

I could see it working in the future, But definitely not now in the current political landscape.

to any Americans voting yes on this poll, I would remind you that the Second is also an old law written by people that were armed with muskets and swords, not AR-15s, and is therefore obsolete and should also be removed.

Either that, or yada yada yada sacred document and you dont get to change anything.

Im fully aware of how amendments work, its your party that doesnt seem to understand.

NatsuSama posted...

This can't be a serious post...

It shouldn't have to explained the absurdity of thinking just because you travel to a new country at a young age it doesn't magically sever all ties you have to the country you were born if nefarious parties are involved.

That's just some line you can move around however you want. When are the ties existing, and when are they not there for sure? Just because of the place of birth?

The current president of my country was the child of refugees, born in this country, but didn't get the citizenship until he was 14 years old (because we don't give citizenship just for the place of birth alone).

The rules here are pretty simple: If you are allowed to vote, you are also mostly allowed to get elected. Only the minimum age is different.

Sweet merciful lord no.

Funny to think that we didn't get an American born President until the 8th one (Martin Van Buren), and he is the only one who English was his second language.

How many people clutching their pearls over the fear that a toddler might have be a sleeper agent defend the major political party that sold its soul to a lunatic who was clearly being manipulated by a hostile nation?

KI_Simpson posted...

You did not ignore it because of that, that is a completely random statement not in any way affiliated with what I said. I am giving you one last chance, explain why whatever you think "nefarious parties" are planning with a two year old can't be done by sending someone to a country with the instructions to have a child there.

You can give many or as lil "chances" as you please. Not sure why you thought "giving me one more chance" means anything lol.

The premise of your question is absurd and doesn't change coming here at 2 does not magically sever all ties you have to the nation you were born from if a foreign adversary is involved and has nefarious intentions.

NatsuSama posted...

You can give many or as lil "chances" as you please lol.

The premise of your question is absurd and doesn't change coming here at 2 does not magically sever all ties you have to the nation you were born from.

Okay, I'll take that as confirmation that you are arguing entirely from xenophobia instead of anything with a logical basis and stop engaging with you. I'll also guess that you're refusing to answer my question because you aren't willing to openly state you hate the 14th amendment as well and wish it could be erased. If you feel these do not accurately represent your position, pretend I asked some completely irrelevant question in an insulting way, which you clearly believe is a quality counterargument.

KI_Simpson posted...

Okay, I'll take that as confirmation that you are arguing entirely from xenophobia

And there's the goto argument that has severely damaged the word xenophobic.

People like you hurt actual examples of xenophobia as people like you treat it as a buzzword to any discussion.

When a discussion doesn't go how you want, and someone won't agree with you, it must be <insert buzzword>. You even went as far as to twist into a pretzel to claim I hate the 14 amendment which is actually astonishing the level of twisting done there.

It should be changed to the extent that if they are citizens by birth and have to file/pay taxes they should be able to.

For example, I am a US citizen living in the UK. My children are also US citizens even though they were born in the UK because I am a US citizen. Once my children turn 18, they will have to file taxes. If they ever make more than the minimum taxable threshold (I think $120k per year) they will be taxpayers, so why not?

I can see why someone shouldn't be able to move to the US and run for president the next day; but those who've lived there for a long time, and especially those who grew up there from a young age, it doesn't make much sense.