• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Schwarzenegger for president in 2008?

Status
Not open for further replies.

doncale

Banned
Schwarzenegger for president in 2008?

A foreign-born U.S. president? Bills would allow just that

Associated Press

WASHINGTON ? Schwarzenegger for president in 2008?

No, he's not eligible. Born in Austria, he's barred by the Constitution. But that would change under an amendment introduced Wednesday by a fellow California Republican.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher's proposal would allow anyone who's been a U.S. citizen for 20 years to run for the nation's highest office. That would include Arnold Schwarzenegger ? bodybuilder, movie star and now governor of California.

Schwarzenegger, who became a citizen in 1983, has said he supports amending the Constitution so foreign-born citizens can run for president. But he's sidestepped questions about whether he might want to run, saying he's focused on governing California.

Rohrabacher said in an interview that Schwarzenegger was doing a great job as governor, but his real aim was to open up the presidential process. "We've got some talented people who might be able to help our country and provide some much-needed leadership, and there's no reason if they've been a citizen for over 20 years to exclude them," he said.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has introduced similar legislation in the Senate.

In remarks prepared for the House floor, he suggested he really wanted to help a California congressman, and a Democrat at that.

"This is no ploy. I honestly believe that Tom Lantos should be able to seek the highest office in the land, just like any other elected official," he said.

Lantos, 76 and born in Hungary, said he saw no need to amend the Constitution.

"However, if the Austro-Hungarian Empire is re-established in the United States, I will invite Arnold Schwarzenegger to be my lieutenant," he said.

Constitutional amendments require passage by two-thirds of both the House and the Senate and then approval by three-fourths of the states.

go Arnold go!
 

MetatronM

Unconfirmed Member
Even if this amendment were to pass Congress (which it won't), there's no way enough states ratify it in time for the 2008 election.
 

ManaByte

Gold Member
LeninaHuxley : I have, in fact, perused some newsreels in the Schwarzenegger Library.
JohnSpartan : Hold it. The Schwarzenegger Library?
LeninaHuxley : Yes. The Schwarzenegger Presidential Library. Wasn't he an actor when you...
JohnSpartan : But how? He was President?
LeninaHuxley : Yes! Even though he wasn't born in this country, his popularity at the time caused the 61st Amendment which states...
JohnSpartan : I don' wanna know. President.

Man, he could run on the Predator ticket. Schwarzenegger for President with Jesse Ventura for Vice President and then they could have Carl Weathers as Secretary of State.
 
Semjaza Azazel said:
That would never pass anyway.
Perhaps it wouldn't... but are there any good reasons? Basically, I'm wondering how the opponents would explain their vote without sounding narrowminded.
 

fennec fox

ferrets ferrets ferrets ferrets FERRETS!!!
'Cos I don't want non-Americans governing me?

Ahh, shoot! That's narrow-minded!

More to the point, I wouldn't want someone governing me who was elected purely out of popularity. Opponents would also be able to point out that Arnie really hasn't accomplished much as governor so far.
 
ManaByte said:
LeninaHuxley : I have, in fact, perused some newsreels in the Schwarzenegger Library.
JohnSpartan : Hold it. The Schwarzenegger Library?
LeninaHuxley : Yes. The Schwarzenegger Presidential Library. Wasn't he an actor when you...
JohnSpartan : But how? He was President?
LeninaHuxley : Yes! Even though he wasn't born in this country, his popularity at the time caused the 61st Amendment which states...
JohnSpartan : I don' wanna know. President.

I was thinking the exact same thing. I loved that movie.
 

MetatronM

Unconfirmed Member
fennec fox said:
'Cos I don't want non-Americans governing me?

Ahh, shoot! That's narrow-minded!

More to the point, I wouldn't want someone governing me who was elected purely out of popularity. Opponents would also be able to point out that Arnie really hasn't accomplished much as governor so far.
Hasn't accomplished much?! But you can't bang a corpse anymore in California thanks to Arnie's tireless efforts!
 
fennec fox said:
'Cos I don't want non-Americans governing me?

Ahh, shoot! That's narrow-minded!
If they've been living in the USA at least 20 years... well, that's theoretically enough time to produce offspring from scratch who are voting citizens. That's American enough for me. Hell, I've barely been a US citizen longer than 20 years.

More to the point, I wouldn't want someone governing me who was elected purely out of popularity. Opponents would also be able to point out that Arnie really hasn't accomplished much as governor so far.
It's not like the amendment is "Arnold gets to be President". Denying all immigrants a right to prevent the possibility of an Arnold presidency is a bit much.
 

DarienA

The black man everyone at Activision can agree on
Glad to see I'm not the only one who sees Demolition Man coming true...
 

fennec fox

ferrets ferrets ferrets ferrets FERRETS!!!
I realized later that I was saying why I was against Arnie as president as opposed to foreign-born citizens in general. Well, how about this: what is the point of having a country, even one like the US, when you have someone who isn't even from that country leading it?
 
fennec fox said:
I realized later that I was saying why I was against Arnie as president as opposed to foreign-born citizens in general. Well, how about this: what is the point of having a country, even one like the US, when you have someone who isn't even from that country leading it?
The point... is to have the person who more fellow citizens want ruling them than anyone else. If more people want a former non-citizen to be President, why deny that? If people don't want that, then the amedment won't do any harm since they wouldn't win the election anyway.

Naturalized citizens get every other right of being a citizen. Why withhold this one? If it's alright to elect people from different states/countries at every other level of government, why not this one office?
 

FoneBone

Member
fennec fox said:
Opponents would also be able to point out that Arnie really hasn't accomplished much as governor so far.
BUT OMG HE IZ ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER AND HE IS THE BEST GOVERNOR EVAR.
 

Saturnman

Banned
For the sake of consistency, they shouldn't try to amend the US constitution just so a particular individual can run. Otherwise, why not abolish term limits just so Clinton can run again? A lot of people would vote for him, probably more so than they would for Kerry.

Whether those restrictions are still relevant nowadays, it is bad policy to abolish them on such short-sighted reasons.
 
Saturnman said:
For the sake of consistency, they shouldn't try to amend the US constitution just so a particular individual can run. Otherwise, why not abolish term limits just so Clinton can run again? A lot of people would vote for him, probably more so than they would for Kerry.

Whether those restrictions are still relevant nowadays, it is bad policy to abolish them on such short-sighted reasons.
If people do a good thing for a questionable reason... they've done a good thing. I think the Arnold factor makes things quite interesting. I'd usually have thought it would be the more conservative Republicans who would be opposed to such an amendment, but the fact that they could have the first benefit from it could sway things.

As for the Clinton thing, I have heard it proposed that they should change things so the limit is 2 _consecutive_ terms. That way one person couldn't stay in power for long periods of time, but could still return if the future deemed them worthy. Clinton is still younger than either of the major candidates now.
 

nathkenn

Borg Artiste
no no, carl weathers has to be head of the cia

ManaByte said:
LeninaHuxley : I have, in fact, perused some newsreels in the Schwarzenegger Library.
JohnSpartan : Hold it. The Schwarzenegger Library?
LeninaHuxley : Yes. The Schwarzenegger Presidential Library. Wasn't he an actor when you...
JohnSpartan : But how? He was President?
LeninaHuxley : Yes! Even though he wasn't born in this country, his popularity at the time caused the 61st Amendment which states...
JohnSpartan : I don' wanna know. President.

Man, he could run on the Predator ticket. Schwarzenegger for President with Jesse Ventura for Vice President and then they could have Carl Weathers as Secretary of State.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
JoshuaJSlone said:
If people do a good thing for a questionable reason... they've done a good thing. I think the Arnold factor makes things quite interesting. I'd usually have thought it would be the more conservative Republicans who would be opposed to such an amendment, but the fact that they could have the first benefit from it could sway things.

As for the Clinton thing, I have heard it proposed that they should change things so the limit is 2 _consecutive_ terms. That way one person couldn't stay in power for long periods of time, but could still return if the future deemed them worthy. Clinton is still younger than either of the major candidates now.

Actually, technically, Clinton can be president for two more years. How that would work out? well your guess is as good as mine.

What if the amendment that mad it legal for foreign born citizens to run for te top office also allowed for mulitple non consecutive terms? Clinton Vs Arnold the reckoning.

that would be a hot campaign imo.
 

Saturnman

Banned
JoshuaJSlone said:
If people do a good thing for a questionable reason... they've done a good thing. I think the Arnold factor makes things quite interesting. I'd usually have thought it would be the more conservative Republicans who would be opposed to such an amendment, but the fact that they could have the first benefit from it could sway things.

As for the Clinton thing, I have heard it proposed that they should change things so the limit is 2 _consecutive_ terms. That way one person couldn't stay in power for long periods of time, but could still return if the future deemed them worthy. Clinton is still younger than either of the major candidates now.

How is it a 'good thing'? The reasoning behind this provision of the constitution is still as valid as it was when the document was written. America was a country built on immigration then, it still is today. Like for the electoral college, it assumes the people can not be entirely trusted to make the right call so certain provisions are there as safeguards.

Even if you argue Schwarzenegger is totally dedicated to America, how can you guarantee it for future candidates? Seeing how the Iraq war was fed to a gullible American audience, I'd be concerned by the prospect of any silver tongue immigrant could rise to the top without his divided loyalties to be questionned.

The US is still a big country and with a big pool of potential presidential candidates. It's not like there's a shortage of them, forcing the country to be less choosy about who can run for office. It's a good thing the US constitution is not easy to change, another wise safeguard.
 

Scrow

Still Tagged Accordingly
While we're on topic, what is the general opinion in America, especially California, of the job Arnold is doing as governor?
 
Scrow said:
While we're on topic, what is the general opinion in America, especially California, of the job Arnold is doing as governor?

1. Generally positive. His views fit well with Californians. People out of state tend to see another Arnold; I'd guess that they tend to see the RNC speech Arnold. Also, he's known for tailoring his speeches to audiances like any politician.
2. A lot of people outside of California don't know about his liberal social positions. I was laughing my head off reading an article on how some people in the East were praising him because they thought he held traditional social values.
 

Teddman

Member
Scrow said:
While we're on topic, what is the general opinion in America, especially California, of the job Arnold is doing as governor?
Arnold is very popular in California, and with good reason in my opinion.
 

Oxymoron

Member
If an amendment were to be proposed, it'd be pretty impossible to camouflage the fact that it's for Arnold. That means that he'll effectively have to fight two elections, including one in which he needs 3/4 of the vote.
 

Swordian

Member
Scrow said:
While we're on topic, what is the general opinion in America, especially California, of the job Arnold is doing as governor?

College/University kids, around here at least, hate him because he keeps cutting our financial aid and raising tuition costs.
 

andthebeatgoeson

Junior Member
What's up with dumb amendments that will tarnish our great Constitution?

Isn't there a fundamental reason behind preventing foreign born citizens from reaching the highest office in the land? Do these fuckers have nothing else to do? Is this necessary? Fuck Arnold.

1st the amendment on gay marriages, now this. How about we further trample the constitution with an amendment on nap time. Make it law.
 

boo7z

Member
skinnyrattler said:
What's up with dumb amendments that will tarnish our great Constitution?

Isn't there a fundamental reason behind preventing foreign born citizens from reaching the highest office in the land? Do these fuckers have nothing else to do? Is this necessary? Fuck Arnold.

1st the amendment on gay marriages, now this. How about we further trample the constitution with an amendment on nap time. Make it law.

No, the reason it was put in there was so that the United States could not be taken over by the British.

No need to worry about that anymore... it should definitely be amended IMO.
 

GDGF

Soothsayer
I have a question. Can a person who has been president (for two terms) then serve as a vice president? If they can, what would happen if the president was assassinated?
 

fennec fox

ferrets ferrets ferrets ferrets FERRETS!!!
Teddman said:
Arnold is very popular in California, and with good reason in my opinion.
Yeah, because he's a movie star. Tell me what he's accomplished.

Anyway, perhaps the presidential law was established to prevent British takeovers. Well, who says we may not have some kind of internal takeover in the future from a foreign country? I don't consider myself an isolationist, but I'd like an American leading America, at least.
 

Matt

Member
Lost Weekend said:
I have a question. Can a person who has been president (for two terms) then serve as a vice president? If they can, what would happen if the president was assassinated?
No, because to be a VP you have to meet all the qualifications for being President.
 

GDGF

Soothsayer
Matt said:
No, because to be a VP you have to meet all the qualifications for being President.

Thanks, my fellow Robotech loving friend. I've been wondering about that for a time.
 
Saturnman said:
Even if you argue Schwarzenegger is totally dedicated to America, how can you guarantee it for future candidates? Seeing how the Iraq war was fed to a gullible American audience, I'd be concerned by the prospect of any silver tongue immigrant could rise to the top without his divided loyalties to be questionned.
There are naturalized citizens who are great people, and US citizens who fight alongside the Taliban. If the average US citizen would fall for and elect a silver-tongued naturalized citizen, they could just as easily fall for and elect a silver-tongued US citizen-from-birth. The Constitution is basically discriminating against people based on something they can't control; their birth citizenship. I'm not cool with that.
 
Swordian said:
College/University kids, around here at least, hate him because he keeps cutting our financial aid and raising tuition costs.

Oh yeah that too. He increased tuition for us while letting other people off the hook. Not only that, he proposed increasing professional school tuition by 40%,which would have made it nearly as expensive as a private school like USC.
 

Dilbert

Member
Matt said:
Article II, Section I.
Thanks.

I'm not 100% sure that the language has to be interpreted as "the VP has to meet the same criteria as the President," though. Has there ever been case law WRT that point?
 

Matt

Member
-jinx- said:
Thanks.

I'm not 100% sure that the language has to be interpreted as "the VP has to meet the same criteria as the President," though. Has there ever been case law WRT that point?
No, there hasn’t (that I know of,) because there has never been a need, in light of the facts that:

A.) The language of Article II, Section I does indicate that a VP has to meet the same qualifications as a President.

B.) Not that it matters, because the only job of a VP (outside of braking Senatorial ties) is to replace the President in case of death (or the invocation of the 25th Amendment,) and the VP would have to meet the qualifications anyway to perform that duty anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom