• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

This Cannot Be a Possibility, Wut?

Rexedgar said:
SOH is second in line to the POTUS, doesn't that person also have to be eligible to hold that job?

I know there s a lot of bullshit out there, especially on this platform, but the way they are knocking down norms……

Click to expand...

Important decisions made based on schoolyard criteria.
Yep. Trump's assembling a Camelot alright. Which job is this latest buffoon lobbying for?
 
Mycroft said:
Regarding succession, Musk could be Speaker but not President. If it would come to it, the succession would just skip him and go to the next person in line.
Click to expand...
Or . . . Musk could get the GOP senate to confirm him as the president, and SCOTUS could rule that the Constitution does not prohibit foreign born nationals from becoming president.

MAGA will cheer it.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
Or . . . Musk could get the GOP senate to confirm him as the president, and SCOTUS could rule that the Constitution does not prohibit foreign born nationals from becoming president.

MAGA will cheer it.
Click to expand...
None of that could...or would...happen.

(Except in the fever dreams of the Trump haters.)
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

I'm sure you'll tell me what you've heard. Right?
Click to expand...
I heard multiple conservative nominees testify before the senate that Roe v Wade was "settled law." We were led to believe that meant that we could believe the conservatives when they declared "Overturn Roe? Nah, that' never gonna happen. "

So pardon me if I don't buy "Oh, that's never gonna happen." Right now, SCOTUS cannot be trusted to do anything the Constitution calls for. They will rule however the **** they want on any issue they want. They are all bought and paid for, and they will do the bidding of their benefactors.
 
Rexedgar said:
SOH is second in line to the POTUS, doesn't that person also have to be eligible to hold that job?

I know there s a lot of bullshit out there, especially on this platform, but the way they are knocking down norms……

Click to expand...

Third ;)
 
Stealers Wheel said:
I heard multiple conservative nominees testify before the senate that Roe v Wade was "settled law."
Click to expand...
Then they were wrong. RvW was never based on "law".

Stealers Wheel said:
We were led to believe that meant that we could believe the conservatives when they declared "Overturn Roe? Nah, that' never gonna happen. "

So pardon me if I don't buy "Oh, that's never gonna happen." Right now, SCOTUS cannot be trusted to do anything the Constitution calls for.
Click to expand...
Regarding RvW, the Supremes DID rule according to the Constitution.
 
Mycroft said:
The succession issue aside, Rand is right. The left's collective head would explode.

Regarding succession, Musk could be Speaker but not President. If it would come to it, the succession would just skip him and go to the next person in line.
Click to expand...

Common Sense 1 said:
One tweet and BOOM!
Click to expand...
Yup, someone's drooling at the thought of it.
 
Mycroft said:
Regarding succession, Musk could be Speaker but not President. If it would come to it, the succession would just skip him and go to the next person in line.
Click to expand...

We got us a constitutional scholar right here folks...
 
Mycroft said:
Then they were wrong. RvW was never based on "law".


Regarding RvW, the Supremes DID rule according to the Constitution.
Click to expand...
That does not address "never gonna happen." SCOTUS is free to say "The Constitution does not prohibit a foreign born national from ascending to the presidency," and there is NOTHING anyone can do about it.
 
Technically Rand Paul is not wrong.

The Constitution does not explicitly say that the Speaker of the House must be selected from those elected to the House, Section 2 "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment." All that is really required is that the person is nominated by someone in the House, and by vote obtain the majority of the full membership of the House.

Unorthodox and dangerous? Yes.

But is possible and passes the Constitution? Also, yes.

So what this really comes down to is the likely shit show of someone like Musk being Speaker of the House. And it would be a complete mess of dysfunction.
 
Erm, I thought you had to be born in the US to be President?

If not then I'm in with a shot.
A vote for me is a vote for more British cheese.

Thats my entire policy platform, just more British cheese.
 
uptower said:
We got us a constitutional scholar right here folks...
Click to expand...
shrug...

Thanks, but one doesn't have to be a "constitutional scholar" to understand reality. One just needs to read the Constitution and use a little bit of common sense.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
That does not address "never gonna happen." SCOTUS is free to say "The Constitution does not prohibit a foreign born national from ascending to the presidency," and there is NOTHING anyone can do about it.
Click to expand...
The Supremes are NOT free to say that. They cannot flout the Constitution.
 
Holy crap people... do you guys always take whatever you hear and just run wild with it??
Obvious to anyone - Rand Paul was not being serious, made clear by the end quote - "imagine the fun of the uniparty losing their ever lovin minds"
It was meant to be humorous.

And here you people are - losing your ever luvin minds.
 
Peter said:
Erm, I thought you had to be born in the US to be President?

If not then I'm in with a shot.
A vote for me is a vote for more British cheese.

Thats my entire policy platform, just more British cheese.
Click to expand...

That is where things get dicey, and we march into areas of the Constitution that have not been challenged this way.

Again, technically speaking there is no requirement of being born in the US to be elected to the House and moreover there is no restriction that the Speaker of the House has to be picked from those elected to the House. So the stage is set for someone not born in the US to become Speaker of the House and by Amendment(s) is 3rd in line to be President even through Article 2, Section 1 specifically limits who can be President to being someone born here.

Best I can tell, no one thought about this scenario all the way through the time of the 25th Amendment seriously enough.

The issue at hand is how the Supreme Court would deal with this, if the House continues to rally behind a Speaker not born in the US, under this odd scenario, and it may get messy.
 
iamwhatiseem said:
Holy crap people... do you guys always take whatever you hear and just run wild with it??
Obvious to anyone - Rand Paul was not being serious, made clear by the end quote - "imagine the fun of the uniparty losing their ever lovin minds"
It was meant to be humorous.

And here you people are - losing your ever luvin minds.
Click to expand...

Actually, some of us are having a good discussion on the possibilities. Not everyone is running wild with this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom