I have a question for the whole forum

[yiostheoy]

If Trump gets rid of the Dept of Commerce, HUD, and the Dept of Labor he will save the Treasury a lot of money.

 

[miketx]

There isn't even a mental test to be president. Therefore, I suppose retards are eligible.

You running?

 

[Auld Phart]

In fact, Hillary Clinton IS qualified to be elected President.

Other than Constitutionally Qualified? I seriously doubt she is qualified for anything other than lying.

That is the whole point of the thread. There are ONLY three qualifications to be elected. It has nothing to do with personal beliefs or who someone would or would not vote for.

You seem to continuously conflate "qualifications" with "eligibility". The Constitution only mentions the latter. That's all it can do.

You seem to continuously conflate "qualifications" with "eligibility".

What were Hillarys "qualifications"?

 

[xyz]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Well, the first two qualifications for impeachment are treason and bribery, Trump is well qualified for that.

 

[Desperado]

Here are the qualifications to be a US President..... Now tell me why Trump is not Qualified to be President?
Qualifications for the Office of President

• 
  Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1
• No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.
  Term limit amendment - US Constitution, Amendment XXII, Section 1 - ratified February 27, 1951
• No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

 

[Crixus]

There isn't even a mental test to be president. Therefore, I suppose retards are eligible.

True dat. Novel idea, how about we make any potential candidate fill out the same paper folks need to fill out to buy a gun. That and a piss test.

 

[Mac1958]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

We'll know in a couple of years whether a person who doesn't have the traditional qualifications to be President can be a good one.

Personally, I think it would be a very good thing if we could reasonably look at options besides career politicians, you bet.

So this experiment could be pretty useful.
.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

There isn't even a mental test to be president. Therefore, I suppose retards are eligible.

You should run in 2020.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Ah thank you. Ahem, speaking on behalf of the whole board, and I thank the board for electing me even though I didn't win the popular vote :::cough::: I would quickly point out the difference between "unqualified" and "Constitutionally unqualified" means you have here constructed a strawman.

I have a match too. Me make fire.

The requirements called out the constitution are all that matter. Those can be objectively determined.

The rest is all a matter of opinion.

And so there is no strawman.

You fail once again.

 

[sealybobo]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Hes just as qualified as George Bush Jr was actually more. And like bush had Chaney running the show trump has pence.

It's not is he qualified. The question is will the GOP fuck the middle class?

 

[Jantje_Smit]

....The question is will the GOP fuck the middle class?

Rethorical question that is

 

[rightwinger]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

One is you have to be born in this country

Trump was born in Jamaica

 

[Pogo]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Ah thank you. Ahem, speaking on behalf of the whole board, and I thank the board for electing me even though I didn't win the popular vote :::cough::: I would quickly point out the difference between "unqualified" and "Constitutionally unqualified" means you have here constructed a strawman.

I have a match too. Me make fire.

The requirements called out the constitution are all that matter. Those can be objectively determined.

The rest is all a matter of opinion.

And so there is no strawman.

You fail once again.

Once again the shortbus kids slow down the class demanding somebody hold their hand and walk them through the obvious. Everybody take a break while we spell it out for Little One.

The OP's first premise: "I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president." No source, just "I keep hearing". And that's OK so far.

He then proceeds to move the goalposts on his own strawman, morphing what he "keeps hearing" into Constitutionally unqualified", which nobody, not even the OP himself, postulated.

Ergo -------------- Strawman.

"Opinion" doesn't even enter into it.

Want me to use even smaller words?


Once that sinks in grapple with this:
if "the requirements called out the constitution are all that matter", why do we have candidates and elections? We could just grab a homeless guy off the subway grate, make sure he's at least 35 and born here, and off we go.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Ah thank you. Ahem, speaking on behalf of the whole board, and I thank the board for electing me even though I didn't win the popular vote :::cough::: I would quickly point out the difference between "unqualified" and "Constitutionally unqualified" means you have here constructed a strawman.

I have a match too. Me make fire.

The requirements called out the constitution are all that matter. Those can be objectively determined.

The rest is all a matter of opinion.

And so there is no strawman.

You fail once again.

Once again the shortbus kids slow down the class demanding somebody hold their hand and walk them through the obvious. Everybody take a break while we spell it out for Little One.

The OP's first premise: "I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president." No source, just "I keep hearing". And that's OK so far.

He then proceeds to move the goalposts on his own strawman, morphing what he "keeps hearing" into Constitutionally unqualified", which nobody, not even the OP himself, postulated.

Ergo -------------- Strawman.

"Opinion" doesn't even enter into it.

Want me to use even smaller words?

That you can't see the difference is not my problem.

Raises the issue.

Points out it can't be an issue (no metrics).

And then points out that the constitution is the only measuring stick we have.

Then asks people to reconcile the two.

There are even shorter buses. Hope you are comfortable.

 

[Pogo]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Ah thank you. Ahem, speaking on behalf of the whole board, and I thank the board for electing me even though I didn't win the popular vote :::cough::: I would quickly point out the difference between "unqualified" and "Constitutionally unqualified" means you have here constructed a strawman.

I have a match too. Me make fire.

The requirements called out the constitution are all that matter. Those can be objectively determined.

The rest is all a matter of opinion.

And so there is no strawman.

You fail once again.

Once again the shortbus kids slow down the class demanding somebody hold their hand and walk them through the obvious. Everybody take a break while we spell it out for Little One.

The OP's first premise: "I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president." No source, just "I keep hearing". And that's OK so far.

He then proceeds to move the goalposts on his own strawman, morphing what he "keeps hearing" into Constitutionally unqualified", which nobody, not even the OP himself, postulated.

Ergo -------------- Strawman.

"Opinion" doesn't even enter into it.

Want me to use even smaller words?

That you can't see the difference is not my problem.

Raises the issue.

Points out it can't be an issue (no metrics).

And then points out that the constitution is the only measuring stick we have.

Then asks people to reconcile the two.

There are even shorter buses. Hope you are comfortable.

.Actually I just spelled out the difference, Haiku-boi.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Ah thank you. Ahem, speaking on behalf of the whole board, and I thank the board for electing me even though I didn't win the popular vote :::cough::: I would quickly point out the difference between "unqualified" and "Constitutionally unqualified" means you have here constructed a strawman.

I have a match too. Me make fire.

The requirements called out the constitution are all that matter. Those can be objectively determined.

The rest is all a matter of opinion.

And so there is no strawman.

You fail once again.

Once again the shortbus kids slow down the class demanding somebody hold their hand and walk them through the obvious. Everybody take a break while we spell it out for Little One.

The OP's first premise: "I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president." No source, just "I keep hearing". And that's OK so far.

He then proceeds to move the goalposts on his own strawman, morphing what he "keeps hearing" into Constitutionally unqualified", which nobody, not even the OP himself, postulated.

Ergo -------------- Strawman.

"Opinion" doesn't even enter into it.

Want me to use even smaller words?

That you can't see the difference is not my problem.

Raises the issue.

Points out it can't be an issue (no metrics).

And then points out that the constitution is the only measuring stick we have.

Then asks people to reconcile the two.

There are even shorter buses. Hope you are comfortable.

.Actually I just spelled out the difference, Haiku-boi.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

 

[Darkwind]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Hes just as qualified as George Bush Jr was actually more. And like bush had Chaney running the show trump has pence.

It's not is he qualified. The question is will the GOP fuck the middle class?

No, that isn't the question at all. The question is exactly what I stated. If you want to make unfounded claims about the middle class, start a thread.

 

[Darkwind]

I keep hearing this "Trump is unqualified" to be president.

So, can any of you name the qualifications (as determined by the Constitution) to be elected President?

I'm talking about the legal language, not your personal opinions nor your personal feelings.

As I understand it, there are only three qualifications for being Elected President.

So have at it. Impress all your friends with the right answer.

Well, the first two qualifications for impeachment are treason and bribery, Trump is well qualified for that.

Take it to court, however; that is not what this thread is about, is it?

 

[Darkwind]

In fact, Hillary Clinton IS qualified to be elected President.

Other than Constitutionally Qualified? I seriously doubt she is qualified for anything other than lying.

That is the whole point of the thread. There are ONLY three qualifications to be elected. It has nothing to do with personal beliefs or who someone would or would not vote for.

You seem to continuously conflate "qualifications" with "eligibility". The Constitution only mentions the latter. That's all it can do.

You seem to continuously conflate "qualifications" with "eligibility".

What were Hillarys "qualifications"?

Hillary is qualified to be President as set forth by the Constitution.

 

[Darkwind]

I meant the poor working class barely scraping by voting and believing in some uber wealthy person is going to do anything that might help them. Yes that's dumb.

Well, this is interesting. You think that some poor guy, who hasn't accomplished anything, would do better for the poor in this country. Why don't you start a thread on it and see how many agree with you.