[POL] Would you vote for Schwarzenegger?
- Thread starter rescath
- Start date
Depends on who ran against him.
Aleph Null
Membership Revoked
Would I? That depends on what he has to say, and who he's running against, and so on. Impossible to know this far out.
Could I? No, because he's not eligible to run, and there is absolutely no way that there are enough votes to amend the Constitution to allow him to run.
-A0-
Could I? No, because he's not eligible to run, and there is absolutely no way that there are enough votes to amend the Constitution to allow him to run.
-A0-
atlantajack
Inactive
How about waiting to see if he is any good at Governor before we start looking to amend the frigging Constitution for him?!
Jack
Jack
I guess I should have added to the poll the option -- "I don't support foreign-born citizens being eligible to be elected president." But I just want to weigh whether those who voted for Bush due to his stance on moral values would still vote for the Abominator -- because the latter, in terms of moral values, is just a very liberal Democrat in disguise.
No non-native American should ever be allowed to become prez.
However, on a THEORETICAL basis, I might vote for him. Again, it would depend on who ran against him, and what his stand on major issues was.
However, on a THEORETICAL basis, I might vote for him. Again, it would depend on who ran against him, and what his stand on major issues was.
mt4design
Has No Life - Lives on TB
I couldn't vote because there is no option for me in this poll.
I voted for Arnold in our Governors election. I would NEVER support a Constitution Amendment that would allow a foreign born person to run for president. NEVER.
No matter who it is.
The Founders knew what they were doing.
Mike
I voted for Arnold in our Governors election. I would NEVER support a Constitution Amendment that would allow a foreign born person to run for president. NEVER.
No matter who it is.
The Founders knew what they were doing.
Mike
Aleph Null
Membership Revoked
If the idea of amending the C had been proposed during a neutral time, say 20 years ago, then maybe.. just MAYBE it might have been possible.
But now that everyone knows why it is being proposed, it becomes a purely political move. Which means that whichever party is putting forth the intended "benificiary" (in this case presumably the Republicans) will be opposed tooth and nail by the other party.
It requires 2/3 of the house and senate, and 3/4 of state legislatures to pass an amendment. There is no candidate in the current political climate that can muster that level of support. It will NOT happen (and for good reason -- you aren't supposed to fiddle with the Constitution for nonsensical purposes like enabling a famous celebrity to be ushered into the White House.)
-A0-
But now that everyone knows why it is being proposed, it becomes a purely political move. Which means that whichever party is putting forth the intended "benificiary" (in this case presumably the Republicans) will be opposed tooth and nail by the other party.
It requires 2/3 of the house and senate, and 3/4 of state legislatures to pass an amendment. There is no candidate in the current political climate that can muster that level of support. It will NOT happen (and for good reason -- you aren't supposed to fiddle with the Constitution for nonsensical purposes like enabling a famous celebrity to be ushered into the White House.)
-A0-
housemouse
Membership Revoked
Voted for Bush, but not because of his moral values exactly. I prefer candidates who form policies based on principles. I do not vote for candidates who form policies based on the fad of the decade.
At this point, I would not vote for Arnold because (1) he is not eligible, and (2) because I do not really understand his principles well enough to predict how he would make decisions.
At this point, I would not vote for Arnold because (1) he is not eligible, and (2) because I do not really understand his principles well enough to predict how he would make decisions.
Fish Speaker
ODERINT DUM METUANT
Not everyone voted for Bush 
based on his "moral values" so there are no options for those people who voted for Bush for reasons that didn't involve his "moral values" to choose from in your poll.
based on his "moral values" so there are no options for those people who voted for Bush for reasons that didn't involve his "moral values" to choose from in your poll.
Shall I remove references to "moral values" from those options?
Setting aside the Constitutional infirmity for the moment.
Lets consider Calfornia's Governor strictly from the policy standpoint. We know the following about him:
1. He favors strict gun control.
2. He favors continueing the murder of the unborn (abortion on demand).
3. He favors continueing heavy immigration from Mexico.
4. He favors unrestricted stem-cell research.
In all of his policy choices shown above he reflects a lack of understanding of the American ethic, and reveals serious moral deficiencies. The only difference between him and Sen. Kerry (the most recent nominee of the Democrat Party) is that he is yet to commit treason.
In any event, the Republic should not tamper with the Constitution to accommodate one individual. The Founders knew what they were doing in this regard.
Lets consider Calfornia's Governor strictly from the policy standpoint. We know the following about him:
1. He favors strict gun control.
2. He favors continueing the murder of the unborn (abortion on demand).
3. He favors continueing heavy immigration from Mexico.
4. He favors unrestricted stem-cell research.
In all of his policy choices shown above he reflects a lack of understanding of the American ethic, and reveals serious moral deficiencies. The only difference between him and Sen. Kerry (the most recent nominee of the Democrat Party) is that he is yet to commit treason.
In any event, the Republic should not tamper with the Constitution to accommodate one individual. The Founders knew what they were doing in this regard.
theoutlands
Official Resister
Gov. Schwartzenager voted in favor of gun-control. That means...
NOT NO BUT HELL NO!
NOT NO BUT HELL NO!
housemouse
Membership Revoked
Thanks, Wooly.
Even if he were a natural born citizen, under those circumstances I would never vote for him. I consider myself a "middle", by the way, not a "right". He has every right to his opinions, but not the right to inflict them on me.
Even if he were a natural born citizen, under those circumstances I would never vote for him. I consider myself a "middle", by the way, not a "right". He has every right to his opinions, but not the right to inflict them on me.
fruit loop
Inactive
Arnold is a good guy
I wouldn't vote for him because of the political party he belongs to - or scratch that, I'd have to hear his stand on the issues first.
Arnold is not a Nazi. He's spent a lot of private money trying to research his grandfather's military past and find out if the guy lied about his record. What his nazi kin may or may not have done is not his fault.
As for being foreign born - well, under the law, a person born abroad to two American parents couldn't run either, even though they're a citizen. This would rule out a lot of kids of military families.
I think birthplace is irrelevant. It's the man's character and skills that should count.
P.S. I DID do something I never thought I'd do in this election....I DID vote for a Republican for the first time in my life. Patrick Ballantine for NC governor. Unfortunately, he lost. I'd also vote for Ron Paul if he ever runs
I wouldn't vote for him because of the political party he belongs to - or scratch that, I'd have to hear his stand on the issues first.
Arnold is not a Nazi. He's spent a lot of private money trying to research his grandfather's military past and find out if the guy lied about his record. What his nazi kin may or may not have done is not his fault.
As for being foreign born - well, under the law, a person born abroad to two American parents couldn't run either, even though they're a citizen. This would rule out a lot of kids of military families.
I think birthplace is irrelevant. It's the man's character and skills that should count.
P.S. I DID do something I never thought I'd do in this election....I DID vote for a Republican for the first time in my life. Patrick Ballantine for NC governor. Unfortunately, he lost. I'd also vote for Ron Paul if he ever runs
OK, time to drag history into this:
What happened the last time a nation, (Germany), gave a foreigner, (Austrian), leadership of their country?
Prior to that, what happened when a nation, (France), gave a foreigner, (Corsican), leadership of their country?
There is no way that this will happen. There's nothing to see here.
What happened the last time a nation, (Germany), gave a foreigner, (Austrian), leadership of their country?
Prior to that, what happened when a nation, (France), gave a foreigner, (Corsican), leadership of their country?
There is no way that this will happen. There's nothing to see here.
fruit loop
Inactive
Well, HipShot....
James I became King of England as well as Scotland and united the kingdom....
When Queen Anne died, her nearest eligible relatives were German royalty, but they did quite well on the throne of jolly old England.....
Maximilian did fairly well as Emperor of Mexico.....
Sam Houston wasn't born in Texas, but made a damned good president of its new republic.....
Doesn't have to mean something bad. It's the quality of the person.
Hitler was just a bad guy all around. Nuff said.
James I became King of England as well as Scotland and united the kingdom....
When Queen Anne died, her nearest eligible relatives were German royalty, but they did quite well on the throne of jolly old England.....
Maximilian did fairly well as Emperor of Mexico.....
Sam Houston wasn't born in Texas, but made a damned good president of its new republic.....
Doesn't have to mean something bad. It's the quality of the person.
Hitler was just a bad guy all around. Nuff said.
Mr_Larry
Inactive
Arnold is basically a libertarian. I'm not sure why he holds the position he does on gun control. Maybe he feels guilty about making all of his violent movies.
Regardless, Arnold has shown he is good at working with the democrats, despite being outnumbered, and he has broad support in California from both liberals and conservatives.
I would definitely vote for Arnold if he ran against Hillary. I don't really think Hillary will become a credible candidate in 2008. But then again, 4 years is a long time away so I suppose anything could happen between now and then.
Regardless, Arnold has shown he is good at working with the democrats, despite being outnumbered, and he has broad support in California from both liberals and conservatives.
I would definitely vote for Arnold if he ran against Hillary. I don't really think Hillary will become a credible candidate in 2008. But then again, 4 years is a long time away so I suppose anything could happen between now and then.
DarkImbolc
Membership Revoked
Ahh-nuld for Pres!?!?
Is Bush not Fascist enough for you!?
Is Bush not Fascist enough for you!?
Bearded Weirdo
Inactive
I also can't vote in this poll because no answer represents my veiwpoint. I voted for President Bush, but not because of his moral values. I voted for President Bush because I think he has the best vision for this country and has done a good job given the variables that have been thrown at him while and before he was in office.
I am against a constitutional amendment allowing Arnold to run just as I was against the idea of a constitutional amendment allowing Reagan to serve a third term.
I am against a constitutional amendment allowing Arnold to run just as I was against the idea of a constitutional amendment allowing Reagan to serve a third term.
Hamilton Felix
Inactive
I had some respect for Arnold, though I do not consider him much of a Republican or Libertarian --- until he signed the .50 caliber ban. This is not an honorable man, this is a politician. Watching him sign a law to ban a large expensive class of weapon that has not even been used in crime, I realized he is devoid of honor and destitute of character. Just another stinkin' Californicate Politician.
oldladydoolin
Inactive
I would vote for Nader before Hillery or Arnold.
brokenwings
Veteran Member
I don't think that Arnold HAS any morals from what I have seen and read! I do NOT support changing our Constitution just because HE wants to run! I think our country has gone mad anyway! Is there such a lack of good people left in this country to run that we have to change our Constitution to allow an ex-porn star to run for President against the most EVIL woman in the country??!!
We really need to spend this next 4 years seeking out a way to change our choice of candidates and find someone who can beat both these Bozos!!!!
We really need to spend this next 4 years seeking out a way to change our choice of candidates and find someone who can beat both these Bozos!!!!
DannyBoy
Wishing I was Cruising with my Sweetie...
very interesting poll
I am in the last catagory, but if the choice was him or hitlery and she was running close in the polls, I would have to go with "the ahnold".
dan
ps... I think it will be her and Obama in 2008 against whomever the Republicans can come up with, and they (the Republicans) may get beat.
I am in the last catagory, but if the choice was him or hitlery and she was running close in the polls, I would have to go with "the ahnold".
dan
ps... I think it will be her and Obama in 2008 against whomever the Republicans can come up with, and they (the Republicans) may get beat.
Green
Paranoid in Los Angeles
I already have voted for Arnold.
And I think he's doing a damn fine job, too.
I consider Arnold to be my kind of Democrat. Conservative and flexible.
And if calling himself a Republican is what it takes to get him elected, then so be it.
He still has to report home to Democrat royalty every night.
And I think he's doing a damn fine job, too.
I consider Arnold to be my kind of Democrat. Conservative and flexible.
And if calling himself a Republican is what it takes to get him elected, then so be it.
He still has to report home to Democrat royalty every night.
rescath said:
In principle, I don't have any problems with foreign-born people as President. It would depend on the foreign-born person.
But I suspect we have about 100 million people in this country who were born in the U.S. and are over 35. As I'm sure one of them would make an adequate president, my thinking is that it's a waste of time to amend the constitution.
The 34 year olds and the foreign born will just have to take comfort in the fact that they don't have to be worried about having to do that particular thankless job.
Night Breeze
Veteran Member
Again history and opinions pop up. First of all the constitution would have to be amended to allow Arnold to run. That being said I can remember a couple of guys that were better qualified to run this country than their bosses. The first was Henry Kissinger during those infamous Nixon years and an immediate second was Zbignew Brezinski during the Carter days. If it were constitutionally possible I would have voted for either of those guys. Oh by the way one was a Republican the other a Democrat.
Simple Man
Inactive
No way I could vote for Arnold. He leans too far left for my liking. And I wouldn't support ammending the Constitution just so he could run.
Besides, if the powers that be hold a Constituational convention, who knows what other evil they may do?
Besides, if the powers that be hold a Constituational convention, who knows what other evil they may do?
RoseTower
Membership Revoked
Okay, here's my paranoid take on this. Any foreign born citizen could possibly be a "sleeper". A sort of Manchurian candidate. It could happen with anyone, but is more likely with a naturalized citizen. Didnt McCain get shot down because of his time as a POW and the fact that he might have been "brainwashed" during that time? Not a good idea, IMO.
This poll was largely an experiment on my part. Apart from those who did not approve of foreign-born presidents at all, the majority of respondents to this point indicate that they voted for Bush because of moral values but would vote for Schwarzenegger over Hillary.
How does that make any sense. Schwarzenegger is in favor of abortion, homosexual marriage, and stem cell research. CA just passed that huge stem cell research funding bill.
How can you vote for a guy who's even worse than Kerry on the "moral issues" when you say you voted for Bush on the "moral issues"?
It's absolute proof the TPTB are successfully manipulating you "social conservatives" via their application of the Hegelian dialectic. Could you ever have imagined yourselves voting for a Pro-Abortion, Pro-Homosexual, Pro-Stem-Cell-Research candidate? Well, it looks like you would now.
How does that make any sense. Schwarzenegger is in favor of abortion, homosexual marriage, and stem cell research. CA just passed that huge stem cell research funding bill.
How can you vote for a guy who's even worse than Kerry on the "moral issues" when you say you voted for Bush on the "moral issues"?
It's absolute proof the TPTB are successfully manipulating you "social conservatives" via their application of the Hegelian dialectic. Could you ever have imagined yourselves voting for a Pro-Abortion, Pro-Homosexual, Pro-Stem-Cell-Research candidate? Well, it looks like you would now.
It's beyond me why anyone who thinks of themselves as even remotely conservative would have anything to do with Schwarzenegger.
Given his support of abortion, embryonic stem-cell research and homosexual "marriage", i wouldn't vote for him if he were the last man.
Given his support of abortion, embryonic stem-cell research and homosexual "marriage", i wouldn't vote for him if he were the last man.