Ahnuld amendment: chances of passing? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 03, 2024, 08:24:26 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Ahnuld amendment: chances of passing? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Ahnuld amendment: chances of passing?  (Read 26649 times)
Demrepdan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,305


« on: November 26, 2003, 12:56:36 AM »

Amending the Constitution just so Ahnuld can run? Changing something that has been in place for 214 years? PFFFFPH!! What the HELL?! I would never support this. I saw more reason to get rid of the natrual born citizen law, when people wanted Henry Kissinger to run for President. And they are trying to do it for AHNULD?! The idea that they would spend time and effort on this amendent is ridiculous. OR, if they were to make this amendment, they should boost it up to more than 20 years. That 20 year thing is just made specifically for Arnold, so he could run in 2008. He has been U.S. Citizen since 1983 so it works out fine. They should make it 25 years, or 30 years! Or better yet, forget the whole thing.
Logged
Demrepdan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,305


« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2003, 04:54:13 PM »
« Edited: November 27, 2003, 04:57:08 PM by Demrepdan »

My extreme radical statement of the day:
Orrin Hatch should be killed, for being Orrin Hatch.
Logged
Demrepdan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,305


« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2003, 05:14:17 PM »
« Edited: November 28, 2003, 05:15:14 PM by Demrepdan »

Hell, I'd pay $100 to see that.... Grin Wink
Logged
Demrepdan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,305


« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2003, 02:59:20 PM »

If they are going to waste time making ANY new amendment, they should abolish the 22nd Amendment. Or at least AMEND it. I think the only terms limits that should be enforced on the President should be a little thing we call elections.
However, I see some people's views, of how the American people may be too stupid, and will keep electing the same person over and over, and that person will posses a GREAT deal of power, like with FDR.
Accordingly, maybe it should just be amendended to 3 term limit instead of 2. Or get rid of it entirely.

   This would make more sense anyway! The only two Presidents who had a VERY good chance of being elected to a 3rd term were Dwight D. Eisenthower, and Ronald Reagan. Both Republicans. Looks like the Republicans screwed themselves over. So why don't they change it now, so President Bush can run a third term?

Whats wrong Senator Hatch? Don't you think Bush can win again? Evidently not, you must think that in order for the Republicans to be elected again in 2008, you must have the strong and powerful AHNULD run.
Logged
Demrepdan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,305


« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2003, 04:30:09 PM »
« Edited: November 29, 2003, 04:39:33 PM by Demrepdan »

Whats wrong Senator Hatch? Don't you think Bush can win again? Evidently not, you must think that in order for the Republicans to be elected again in 2008, you must have the strong and powerful AHNULD run.

Loada crap dude an you know it Cheesy
It was sarcasm.....
so yeah..I guess I do know it. Wink

But my overall point was simply that I would rather see the end of the 22nd amendment, something that has been in place for just over 50 years, as opposed to taking out the clause of natural born US citizens becoming President, which has been in effect for over 214 years. Wasting time on this latter amendment is nonsense. And why wait until NOW...to change it?  Natural born citizen law.....you're TERMINATED
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 10 queries.