US Elections 2020 (geopolitics, informed debate, no ad hominems)

Biden

14 (66.7%)

Trump

7 (33.3%)

Total Members Voted: 21

Voting closed: November 02, 2020, 06:25:59 pm

[Craig Lamson]

Hard to believe that the same old Birther Conspiracy crap using Vattel is still being peddled. Good luck with that.

I didn't know that the birther conspiracy kook website The Post and Email still existed. Maybe the owner can team up with "Queen of the Birthers" Orly Taitz, the attorney (and dentist) who argued the Vattel citizenship notion in federal and state courts and election boards all over the country making a fool of herself.

"The current owner/editor is Sharon Rondeau, who states she is a natural born American Citizen who began researching the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama during the 2008 election cycle."

“Since its founding, The Post & Email has been on the forefront of the Obama identity/eligibility issue.”

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-post-email/

The questions still exist and have yet to be resolved in a court of law in the recent past.  Maybe this time it will, or not. 
But it’s good to know that in TechTalk land, questioning an undecided issue is “kook”.

[JoeKitchen]

All kidding aside, a heated toilet seat is a pretty awesome luxury.

The elite really do have it great!   

[James Clark]

Or Natural Born  as a requirement for the office of President, means born on American soil of two permanent legal residents. 

Even the cited de Vattel stuff doesn’t say that.  As I said at the start, “citizen” is, in the strictly textual sense, actually arguably *looser* than what I’m arguing, being defined by “subject to jurisdiction.”   I believe the Newsweek author in question actually realizes this, because he argues the definition of “subject to jurisdiction.”   That some desperation, my friend

Seriously, this is a non-serious issue and Kern is exactly right - it’s beneath reasonable consideration.

[Craig Lamson]

I kind of got lost in all the above about court cases and I don't know what else. Harris was born in the USA, right? That's my understanding from the few things I've read. That makes her American, doesn't it? So she can run for office, right. Isn't that all there is to it?

Trump or his spokespeople can just make up the dumbest shit and some people will go along with it. Is that's what going on here? Is that where America is now?

The question is HOW American is she.  😎

[James Clark]

I kind of got lost in all the above about court cases and I don't know what else. Harris was born in the USA, right? That's my understanding from the few things I've read. That makes her American, doesn't it? So she can run for office, right. Isn't that all there is to it?

Trump or his spokespeople can just make up the dumbest shit and some people will go along with it. Is that's what going on here? Is that where America is now?

Pretty much this covers it, yeah. 

[James Clark]

The question is HOW American is she.  😎

As American as Nikki Haley

[faberryman]

But of course the question is still unsettled.  And that’s why we are having this conversation.

I have forgotten. Why wasn’t this issue settled during the 2008 and 2012 elections? Those seem like they would have been good times to address it.

[JoeKitchen]

I kind of got lost in all the above about court cases and I don't know what else. Harris was born in the USA, right? That's my understanding from the few things I've read. That makes her American, doesn't it? So she can run for office, right. Isn't that all there is to it?

Trump or his spokespeople can just make up the dumbest shit and some people will go along with it. Is that's what going on here? Is that where America is now?

Your first statement is correct.  Your second is not really accurate. 

Essentially a crazy right wing lawyer wrote an article questioning her ability to be VP since neither of her parents where not born in the USA and there are a discrepancies about whether they were citizens at the time of her birth.  So, is she really a natural born citizen?  The constitution never actually defines this, but if Ted Cruz is one, Harris should be one too.  And every lawyer agrees she is with the exception of a hand full.  Trump was then asked about this article the day it was published and he had only seen it in passing, which was obvious.  He gave the appropriate answer, namely he just found out about it, was not sure (since he only was read so much on it) and would assume the Dems would have checked it out (which would be expected).  Him praising the lawyer certainly did not help him, but it was reasonable response that did not confirm the allegation. 

If next week he pushes this again or is indecisive, I'll agree he is being a tool bag.  But at this point, I think it is just the media trying to make story out of nothing. 

[James Clark]

The elite really do have it great!   

It’s a whole different world from the white porcelain junk the common man sits on every day, my friend.

[Craig Lamson]

Even the cited de Vattel stuff doesn’t say that.  As I said at the start, “citizen” is, in the strictly textual sense, actually arguably *looser* than what I’m arguing, being defined by “subject to jurisdiction.”   I believe the Newsweek author in question actually realizes this, because he argues the definition of “subject to jurisdiction.”   That some desperation, my friend

Seriously, this is a non-serious issue and Kern is exactly right - it’s beneath reasonable consideration.

It may be non-serious in the eyes of some and serious in the eyes of others.  It’s really not for journalists or law professors to decide, any more that we can.  Only the courts or an amendment to the Constitution to define or correct it.

Personally I could care less. Harris has enough baggage that this is just a distraction.  But it is less than three months to the election , it’s American Politics and everything is pretty much fair game.

[James Clark]

Your first statement is correct.  Your second is not really accurate. 

Essentially a crazy right wing lawyer wrote an article questioning her ability to be VP since neither of her parents where born in the USA and there are a discrepancies about whether they were citizens at the time of her birth.  So, is she really a natural born citizen?  The constitution never actually defines this, but if Ted Cruz is one, Harris should be one too.  And every lawyer agrees she is with the exception of a hand full.  Trump was then asked about this article the day it was published and he had only seen it in passing, which was obvious.  He gave the appropriate answer, namely he just found out about it, was not sure (since he only was read so much on it) and would assume the Dems would have checked it out (which would be expected).  Him praising the lawyer certainly did not help him, but it was reasonable response that did not confirm the allegation. 

If next week he pushes this again or is indecisive, I'll agree he is being a tool bag.  But at this point, I think it is just the media trying to make story out of nothing.

Check out Trump vs Ted in 2016.   Trump (the son of at least one, maybe two foreign citizens) argues that “it’s different because I (Trump) was born here”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/01/14/donald-trump-ted-cruz-citizenship/78824512/

As in most things, Trump was being a tool bag.  There is precious little doubt he will continue to be. It’s his way.

[Craig Lamson]

I have forgotten. Why wasn’t this issue settled during the 2008 and 2012 elections? Those seem like they would have been good times to address it.

It appears it is not.

[faberryman]

It appears it is not.

I am not sure I understand your response. Could you clarify why this issue with respect to the 2008 and 2012 elections of Obama was not adjudicated.

[Alan Klein]

Ooh.  Let’s get textual. .

 In the context of eligibility for office, there are a couple of serious problems with her set-up, if one is trying to draw the conclusion that one must be born of two citizens (as the term is used today) on native soil to carry citizenship. 

One, by the definition she is ascribing to de Vattel’s useage (lent authority by the claim that the founders were considering his work - an assertion that, while true, isn’t as relevant as she claims,  but that’s irrelevant here)  “citizen” is merely defined as one who is a participant in the society, subject to the authority of, and contributes to, the public body.  A “natural born citizen” is one who is born to such a person.  That’s it. 

Second, and flowing from that, if de Vattel’s standard for citizenship requires anything more than jurisdiction and participation, it immediately eliminates any of the founders in question from citizenship, which is, of course, absurd. 

In a more general sense, I have no problem deriving original intent from European enlightenment thinking - its very, very simple to draw a straight line between the ideals my country was founded on and those ideas, just as it’s proper and reasonable to find the basis of our law in English common law. What you CAN’T do is make a strictly textual argument and then proceed to embellish the text in an effort to create a *more restrictive* definition.

BUT....  the 14th Amendment renders the whole issue moot in exceedingly plain language anyway, and even in the post-14th USSC discussion she cites, nothing limits the definition to children of citizens, it merely reinforces that that specific circumstance is clearly established.

Edit: good Lord, there are some looney tunes that are posting in her comments section. 

I'm not sure what you were getting at regarding the bolded portion above.  But just to clarify a point to everyone, you don't have to be a "natural born citizen" if you were a citizen prior to the adoption of the constitution which occured in Sept 18, 1787.  That would give foreigners born in England let's say, the right to be president as long as they were citizens prior to this date and met the other qualifications.  Article II of the Constitution says:
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause_5:_Qualifications_for_office

[Craig Lamson]

Check out Trump vs Ted in 2016.   Trump (the son of at least one, maybe two foreign citizens) argues that “it’s different because I (Trump) was born here”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/01/14/donald-trump-ted-cruz-citizenship/78824512/

As in most things, Trump was being a tool bag.  There is precious little doubt he will continue to be. It’s his way.

The material I’ve read says Fred Trump, was was born in the USA and Mary became a naturalized citizen in 1942, before Donal was born. 

[Craig Lamson]

I am not sure I understand your response. Could you clarify why this issue with respect to the 2008 and 2012 elections of Obama was not adjudicated.

It was never clarified in a court of law, just ignored.  But his case is different that Harris.  At least his mother was an American. 😎

[JoeKitchen]

Check out Trump vs Ted in 2016.   Trump (the son of at least one, maybe two foreign citizens) argues that “it’s different because I (Trump) was born here”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/01/14/donald-trump-ted-cruz-citizenship/78824512/

As in most things, Trump was being a tool bag.  There is precious little doubt he will continue to be. It’s his way.

Well, he's just like a poker buddy of mine that always plays pocket 2s, you just cant understand why someone would play an obvious bad hand. 

[faberryman]

It was never clarified in a court of law, just ignored.  But his case is different that Harris.  At least his mother was an American.

Gosh, if it were an important issue you would have thought someone would have sought to have it clarified by the courts.

[Craig Lamson]

Gosh, if it were an important issue you would have thought someone would have sought to have it clarified by the courts.

I don’t remember exactly But I seem to recall someone tried but they were dismissed due to lack of standing.  Don’t quote me on this.

[JoeKitchen]

Gosh, I really think I am in the Twilight Zone right now. 

On one hand, every liberal is trying to make a mountain out of a ant hill, where Trump was asked about an article he could have only seen in passing (since he was asked about it the day it came out, which the reporter knew) that was an obviously ploy to make him look bad.  Really, you libs have truly developed chronic TDS and need to seek medical attention like right now. 

On the other hand, all the conservatives are defending the concept that she could not be a natural born citizen as if this is even going to make it to court.  It's not, and it will be totally foolish and detrimental if Trump tries to push this any further.