I have a question for the whole forum

[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"?

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

as qualified as Trump

 

[Darkwind]

Trump for years said that Obama was not qualified to be president because he wasn't born in the US.

People say Trump isn't qualified to be president because saying shit like that makes him an idiot.

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

 

[Darkwind]

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.

as qualified as Trump

Yep. Both meet the minimum qualifications. As far as that goes, I meet the minimum qualifications. I even have a vote in the last election!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump for years said that Obama was not qualified to be president because he wasn't born in the US.

People say Trump isn't qualified to be president because saying shit like that makes him an idiot.

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

 

[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?

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.

No new administration walks in with experience running a country. I'm more worried about the GOP agenda than their resumes as robber barons

 

[Darkwind]

Trump for years said that Obama was not qualified to be president because he wasn't born in the US.

People say Trump isn't qualified to be president because saying shit like that makes him an idiot.

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

 

[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.

No new administration walks in with experience running a country. I'm more worried about the GOP agenda than their resumes as robber barons

A legitimate concern, as I had the exact same fears (inexperience) with Obama. However, this nonsense about robber barons and destroying the middle class is just fear expressed in hyperbole. Trump is less of a threat to the middle class than Obama was, simply because Trump understands better what actually makes the middle class.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump for years said that Obama was not qualified to be president because he wasn't born in the US.

People say Trump isn't qualified to be president because saying shit like that makes him an idiot.

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So if we all say that Trump is thoroughly 'unsuited' to be president, you'll quit this lame semantics rant?

 

[Darkwind]

Trump for years said that Obama was not qualified to be president because he wasn't born in the US.

People say Trump isn't qualified to be president because saying shit like that makes him an idiot.

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So if we all say that Trump is thoroughly 'unsuited' to be president, you'll quit this lame semantics rant?

No, I will continue to address the truth of this matter with regard to Constitutional qualifications.

You will be free (you can thank a military member for that) to express you opinion. I don't think Trump is suited to the Presidency, which is why I didn't vote for him. However, I don't think he is unsuited based on some progressive boogerman ideology.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump for years said that Obama was not qualified to be president because he wasn't born in the US.

People say Trump isn't qualified to be president because saying shit like that makes him an idiot.

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So now you admit I was right.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Wow, a question for the whole forum. And such a clever one. Awesome.

 

[Darkwind]

Trump for years said that Obama was not qualified to be president because he wasn't born in the US.

People say Trump isn't qualified to be president because saying shit like that makes him an idiot.

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So now you admit I was right.

No, I said i remembered it. This discussion is not centered around who is better experienced, but on who is qualified. I started it in response to listening to one elector saying he was not going to vote based upon Trump being unqualified; and a video by Hollywood morons who are urging others to do the same based upon the same argument.

Trump IS qualified so the electors are going to have to justify their betrayal of the voters in other ways.

 

[Pogo]

Wow, a question for the whole forum. And such a clever one. Awesome.

A "question" He poses (you have to capitalize He because He thinks He's some kind of deity) as "I keep hearing Rump is unqualified", then proceeds to treat the adjective qualified as if it meant eligible and whenever anyone points out the dishonest conflation He runs away to a corner and goes "la la la".

This thread is nothing more than another monologue, full of sound and conflation, signifying nothing. He just wants to watch Himself post.

 

[Divine Wind]

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

Interesting fantasy but as unrealistic as a "gun-free" America.

 

[Divine Wind]

Trump for years said that Obama was not qualified to be president because he wasn't born in the US.

People say Trump isn't qualified to be president because saying shit like that makes him an idiot.

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So now you admit I was right.

No, I said i remembered it. This discussion is not centered around who is better experienced, but on who is qualified. I started it in response to listening to one elector saying he was not going to vote based upon Trump being unqualified; and a video by Hollywood morons who are urging others to do the same based upon the same argument.

Trump IS qualified so the electors are going to have to justify their betrayal of the voters in other ways.

As mentioned by several already, there are only 3 Constitutional qualifications for President.

The real question is "Who is best qualified". A question that goes beyond Constitutional requirements. That question is best answered by recognizing we had the two most disliked candidates in living history run for office and the fact that our election system effectively allows only two choices. Sure, several like myself voted third party, but most Americans, 94.5%, held their noses and picked either the "D" or the "R". Not because they necessarily liked that candidate, but because of their party and/or because they liked the other person less.

 

[Darkwind]

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So now you admit I was right.

No, I said i remembered it. This discussion is not centered around who is better experienced, but on who is qualified. I started it in response to listening to one elector saying he was not going to vote based upon Trump being unqualified; and a video by Hollywood morons who are urging others to do the same based upon the same argument.

Trump IS qualified so the electors are going to have to justify their betrayal of the voters in other ways.

As mentioned by several already, there are only 3 Constitutional qualifications for President.

The real question is "Who is best qualified". A question that goes beyond Constitutional requirements. That question is best answered by recognizing we had the two most disliked candidates in living history run for office and the fact that our election system effectively allows only two choices. Sure, several like myself voted third party, but most Americans, 94.5%, held their noses and picked either the "D" or the "R". Not because they necessarily liked that candidate, but because of their party and/or because they liked the other person less.

No, its not. The question I asked is asked for a specific reason.
If you wish to add qualifiers that are determined by opinion, then start a different thread.

 

[Divine Wind]

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So now you admit I was right.

No, I said i remembered it. This discussion is not centered around who is better experienced, but on who is qualified. I started it in response to listening to one elector saying he was not going to vote based upon Trump being unqualified; and a video by Hollywood morons who are urging others to do the same based upon the same argument.

Trump IS qualified so the electors are going to have to justify their betrayal of the voters in other ways.

As mentioned by several already, there are only 3 Constitutional qualifications for President.

The real question is "Who is best qualified". A question that goes beyond Constitutional requirements. That question is best answered by recognizing we had the two most disliked candidates in living history run for office and the fact that our election system effectively allows only two choices. Sure, several like myself voted third party, but most Americans, 94.5%, held their noses and picked either the "D" or the "R". Not because they necessarily liked that candidate, but because of their party and/or because they liked the other person less.

No, its not. The question I asked is asked for a specific reason.
If you wish to add qualifiers that are determined by opinion, then start a different thread.

Yes, I fully understand you want to look at this through a narrow tube, but the truth is found with a wider view. Reality doesn't exist in very narrow views. It exists within all the factors involved and influencing it.

 

[Pogo]

Wow. *lauging*

Not being born in the USA actually is a qualification. (I'm no birther and don't believe Obama is not a citizen)

Making statements that the progressives disagree with is NOT actually in the Constitution as a dis-qualifier. Surely, even you can see that.

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So now you admit I was right.

No, I said i remembered it. This discussion is not centered around who is better experienced, but on who is qualified. I started it in response to listening to one elector saying he was not going to vote based upon Trump being unqualified; and a video by Hollywood morons who are urging others to do the same based upon the same argument.

Trump IS qualified so the electors are going to have to justify their betrayal of the voters in other ways.

As mentioned by several already, there are only 3 Constitutional qualifications for President.

The real question is "Who is best qualified". A question that goes beyond Constitutional requirements. That question is best answered by recognizing we had the two most disliked candidates in living history run for office and the fact that our election system effectively allows only two choices. Sure, several like myself voted third party, but most Americans, 94.5%, held their noses and picked either the "D" or the "R". Not because they necessarily liked that candidate, but because of their party and/or because they liked the other person less.

Zackly. Would be interesting to poll how many voters voted positively for a choice versus how many voted negatively for a block. Yet another pitfall of the Electrical College's "winner take all" malarkey that negates millions of votes, suppresses turnout in general and perpetuates the stale Duopoly, ensuring that nothing will ever threaten it.

I find it poignantly ironic that the same crowd that crows about shaking things up, "draining the swamp" and jettisoning the Same Old Thing, are the same crowd who jump up in screaming defense of the EC system that keeps the Same Old Thing permanently in place. Hypocrisy writ large.

 

[Darkwind]

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So now you admit I was right.

No, I said i remembered it. This discussion is not centered around who is better experienced, but on who is qualified. I started it in response to listening to one elector saying he was not going to vote based upon Trump being unqualified; and a video by Hollywood morons who are urging others to do the same based upon the same argument.

Trump IS qualified so the electors are going to have to justify their betrayal of the voters in other ways.

As mentioned by several already, there are only 3 Constitutional qualifications for President.

The real question is "Who is best qualified". A question that goes beyond Constitutional requirements. That question is best answered by recognizing we had the two most disliked candidates in living history run for office and the fact that our election system effectively allows only two choices. Sure, several like myself voted third party, but most Americans, 94.5%, held their noses and picked either the "D" or the "R". Not because they necessarily liked that candidate, but because of their party and/or because they liked the other person less.

No, its not. The question I asked is asked for a specific reason.
If you wish to add qualifiers that are determined by opinion, then start a different thread.

Yes, I fully understand you want to look at this through a narrow tube, but the truth is found with a wider view. Reality doesn't exist in very narrow views. It exists within all the factors involved and influencing it.

This is how we get the government we get, though views like this. Each and every element of life can be evaluated at is most granular level. This is why we need things such as "single subject" legislation.

However, when addressing a problem of perception, where a very wide view allows for the blurring of truth, the most useful tool to get said truth is a narrow view.

You don't care for that, fine. I'd invite you to start your own thread.

 

[Divine Wind]

People (your RW pals btw and maybe even you) said that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be president than Barack Obama

because she had executive experience in government and he didn't.

Remember that?

I do remember that, and I remember it was in a different context. I do believe they were talking "experience" not qualifications. However, I've never said that Obama was not qualified to be President. Over his head, yes. Unsuited to the position, yes. Unqualified, no.

So now you admit I was right.

No, I said i remembered it. This discussion is not centered around who is better experienced, but on who is qualified. I started it in response to listening to one elector saying he was not going to vote based upon Trump being unqualified; and a video by Hollywood morons who are urging others to do the same based upon the same argument.

Trump IS qualified so the electors are going to have to justify their betrayal of the voters in other ways.

As mentioned by several already, there are only 3 Constitutional qualifications for President.

The real question is "Who is best qualified". A question that goes beyond Constitutional requirements. That question is best answered by recognizing we had the two most disliked candidates in living history run for office and the fact that our election system effectively allows only two choices. Sure, several like myself voted third party, but most Americans, 94.5%, held their noses and picked either the "D" or the "R". Not because they necessarily liked that candidate, but because of their party and/or because they liked the other person less.

Zackly. Would be interesting to poll how many voters voted positively for a choice versus how many voted negatively for a block. Yet another pitfall of the Electrical College's "winner take all" malarkey that negates millions of votes, suppresses turnout in general and perpetuates the stale Duopoly, ensuring that nothing will ever threaten it.

I find it poignantly ironic that the same crowd that crows about shaking things up, "draining the swamp" and jettisoning the Same Old Thing, are the same crowd who jump up in screaming defense of the EC system that keeps the Same Old Thing permanently in place. Hypocrisy writ large.

Like the 1960 election, this election will be well studied as a watershed moment in US history.

Voter dissatisfaction reached a low point in this election.
Already-low voter satisfaction with choice of candidates falls even further

Negative views of opposing candidate were 28%
Aversion to Other Candidate Key Factor in 2016 Vote Choice
As noted, 28% of both Clinton and Trump voters say they are backing that person because of something they don't like about the other candidate. Among the specific responses that make up this category, Trump voters are most likely to cite their lack of trust in Clinton. This is followed by their dislike of her, their determination to vote against her and their decision to vote for Trump as the "lesser of two evils."

Clinton voters are a bit more likely to give the "lesser of two evils" response, followed by saying that they dislike Trump and that he doesn't have the temperament to be president.

But it's more than dislike, it's also simply being against the opposing side, another factor that increased this election:
1. Voters’ general election preferences