Ahnold for Prez
 

does anyone want the Governator to be president?
Do you believe that immigrants should have the ability to run for presidency.

I think that is a bad step to allow foreign born persons to become president, even if they have citizenship. I like Arnold as an actor and he has done a few things against the grain in Cali, but as a president that is way too much power for the terminator to have.

The reasons to avoid having a foreign born president were laid out well in the Federalist papers and I have not seen a convincing argument yet against them.

As to Ahnold, he might be a good president, but unless the constitution is changed, we'll never know.

Why?

I see that you are against it, but I have no clue why you feel this way.

I think it would be a final validation of the "coming to America" great immigrant story, in which we acknowledge the most excellent contributions of our new citizens, to allow them to aspire to the Presidency.

As for Arnold - I would support his candidacy, yes.

It's not that I don't think that Arnold wouldn't be a good President...he well could be. The fact is, I just don't devote much thought to it, because...he can't. Not unless the Constitution is changed, which I do not support. If the Constitution is changed to allow immigrants to atain the Presidency...then I feel that it should not take effect for a period of 25 years, to eliminate the possibility of changing our most precious national document for the benefit of one man. Arnold cannot be President.

Bleah. No way, it's bad enough having him as my governor, thankyouverymuch. And who wants to eat at Taco Bell every damn day?! :D

Coppertop, I am glad I am not the only one who sees the amazing, "how can this be happening", train of events that parallels that movie.

I'd be in favor of an amendment, but not for a particular person, if that makes sense. I'd rather it come about by a feeling that it would be the Great American Story, not because another rich politician wanted something he couldn't have.

lol c'mon you have to think outside the bun.

Becaise I believe that even though a person may come to this country and may abide by the law of the land that still should not equate to them being able to run for presidency. Sure they can get a cabinet or congressional job. I just think the presidency should just be that sole position only granted to american-born persons.

Do I support this man for President of the United States, the most powerful position in the world?
<embed src="http://media.santoalt.com/101/pothead_arnoldsmokincrack.wmv"</embed>
yes I do!

Sure, I would support Arnold running for pres. What could be more American than the Austrian Oak. Don't know if I'd vote for him though.

I wouldn't vote for him, I disagree with most of his social policies. That would be an election where I go Constitution Party.

This country is nothing but a bunch of immigrants, except for the Native Americans. I see no reason why he couldn't run for president. If Americans want him we'll vote for him, if not then we won't vote for him.

Yeah, because smoking pot should disqualify you from holding office...

It's almost reason to vote for him!

And matter of factly Typhus, I am not an immigrant, nor is anyone in my family, for several generations; I assume this is the case for most people here on this forum and in the country at large.

Unless you're an actual Native American, you could eventually trace your roots to a different country. I didn't mean immigrant literally. What I meant is that America is a big melting pot of people from all over the world.

Native Americans could trace there roots to a different country of origin. The only issue is time.

Actually you can only go back so far. The USA wasn't a country forever. I'd argue that those that became the first citizens were not immigrants.

Correction: The "Native" Americans immigrated here from Asia.

Yes, go back far enough and we're all African. I suppose some might say Edenese? Either way, there was a time when what is now North America had no humans.

My post was not sarcastic, the pot smoking is one of my primary reasons for supporting Arnold Schwarzenegger for President. Arnold is substancially closer to my own political beliefs compared to our current executive office holders. I'm not so blinded by the "Republican" label that I would disqualify Arnold solely on that basis.

Well chalk this up as one point we both agree on!

My only issue with putting Arnold in the White House is that it would be the final symbolic step in choosing style over substance in America, the celebrification, if you will, of everything. We'd be picking him because we liked him, not because we thought he would do a good job. I imagine many people would think "Sure, he can't be any worse than those career politicians in Washington!"

On the other hand, it's just Reagan again.

My two cents on this is that the most qualified person should be allowed to run for President. IF a party wants to make them their canidate, and IF a majority of the country wants that person to represent them, then how could that not be allowed? The reality in this country is that even if it was allowed, I doubt many outside the cities would vote for an immigrant anyway. Maybe I'm shortchanging our populace, but I just don't think it would happen.

Based on the three for four articles I have read of his handling of california, I, a registered democrat, would likely vote for Arnold. He is a rather liberal person, socially, and fiscally conservative. Perhaps the most appealing single characteristic is that he actually thinks for himself; the party doesn't think for him. His support of gay marriage (ok, civil unions, but that's just fine by me) when his "higher ups" like bush want to *%#^%'in ban it...that earns points in my book. They say he's been rather effective in breaking 'logjams' in california. Of course, I'm a New York Liberal, so what do I know? Oh, and the amendment will never happen; it's a classic case of over reaction and people getting ahead of themselves.

P.S. A New York Liberal who votes for a republician is worth noting.
P.P.S 40% of NY voted for Bush. I, however, did not.

After thinking about it, I have to agree with BOR.

I don't mind having the Constitution change, after all it is it's flexability that has allowed the Constitution to remain one of the defining documents of our nation. However, it seems a bit too much to change it just for one man. And really that's all that it is. I don't seem to recall a movement to amend the Constitution before Arnold was sworn in as governor. It's a political move by a group of far thinking activists who want to ride popular momentum.

So, yeah, if the country needs to change it (and I see no reason why not) then let it take effect in the future to benefit the political aspirations of candidates in the future not just for Arnold Schwarzenegg......Arnold.

At least in the USA the idea of a immigrant for president or country leadership could be talked about.

I'm born in America and can run for president, but i'm only 23. Arnold has been here longer then me, and can't. Kinda odd don't you think. I could almost say he's more american then me...which is kinda odd to think off.

I wouldn't be phased at all to see it changed to 35 years of american citizan ship to run for president, rather then 35 years old (or was it 40 for president and 35 for senator, please correct me if you guys know.)

I think it's 35. I agree. A "time limit" sounds like it would make more sense than having to born on US soil.

Yes we all know that immigrant Austrians make great leaders (just ask the Germans), seriously though. What is the big deal? He is more American than Austrian at this moment and as Konichiwaneko said he has been in the USA longer than many of the people on this board.

I understand that your constitution needs "refurbishing" to fit the situation, but if the majority of the people feel that it is okay than why not? Just do it for the good reasons and not for the sole purpose of electing 1 man (Arnold) as president and ad an "time limit" to it of a few decades.

I prefer to keep it American born but that being said, amending it is up to the Constitution and states and imo it should be based on a period of living in America. I do not want to see a day where a guy comes to America and in a year is president - however a guy who has been here and seen it and lived for a while could qualify fine.

Would it not be better to elect the best person for the job? By giving a person American Citizenship that person is American for all intensive purposes. President of the US would be like 30 Years as a US citizen, that means that the person is actually mostly American so should have the chance to run... mind you I am not American so maybe my views don't count.

I might support Arnold, mostly because he's independent of the traditional behind-the-scenes special interests and corporations that run our government. But I think the president should be American born, to ensure loyalty pretty much.

Look at the problems that arise in this country from our own home-grown politicians sending pork barrel projects to their home constituants. Anyone in a position to run for president of the United States is very likely of a "higher social class" (read that to say rich, if you want to), even an immigrant. In turn, a first generation, foriegn-born individual that is in a position to run for president would likely have family in a higher social class in their home country. Thus, their family members "back home" would probably be in a position of greater power than the average citizen in their home country, whether privately or in government.

We have enough tax-payer dollars spent on pork barrel projects on our own shores. The opportunity for a foriegn born president to influence international policy based on this family ties, ties that would extend to foriegn shores is too great.

It is something we don't even want to contemplate.

If Arnold wants the power of leadership and really wants to help America, let him lead the United Nations. That organization really needs The Terminator.

I do not mind the idea of immigrants running. In fact I support it. But I agree changing it for one man cheapens the constitution to a degree...I say put a time limit for it to be effective. and then make it something like 35 years in this country to run for office. By that point most people would be rather Americanized.

We already had one actor for a president, and look how great that worked out for the US. Reagan worked well with a monkey in movies and about as well with the ones in congress.

My fear is that if he did run he would be elected, but I disagree with having to be US born to be president. That being said I am in favor of citizenship exams as a requirement to be able to vote in the first place.

My hope would be that educated voters would equal an educated choice for all elected officers.

I would say that if one is deemed appropriate enough in becoming an American citizen, then from that day on they should be eligible for the presidency.

From what I've seen the people who are born citizens actually know less and care less about the country then those immagriants who get their citizenship legally.

he's a republican, which is good in my books.... if his popularity doesthe same thing in teh presidental election as it did in the florida election, he would win with ease.... which makes him a scary idea for democrats


for alot of people, politians are boring people who just sit behind desks and kiss babies, but arnold is a action hero

This is exactly why I am in favor of requiring a citizen ship test in order to vote.

ANy one remember the movie Demolition Man?!?!?!? Just funny people are talking about Arnold as President.

FYI that movie starred stallone, not arnold.

Yeah, but in the the movie Arnold had become president in their past.

Also I agree with the 30 years of being a US citizen, but mabye we should add that their primary residence has to have been in the US for the same ammount of time?

There was a part in the Movie where Sandra Bullock was esxplaining some of the stuff that had happened in the past.

One of the things she mentioned was the fact that the constitution was changed so that Arnold could be elected president.

Ahhh. Dont remember that part:P

"The purpose of the native-born-citizen requirement has long passed, and it is time for us ... to remove this impediment," Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, said when he introduced a constitutional-amendment proposal last year. He cited the more than 700 Medal of Honor winners who have been immigrants, "but no matter how great their sacrifice, leadership or love for this country, they remain ineligible to be a candidate for president."

I don't think the Founding Fathers’ concerns about divided allegiances are still valid and the Constitution should be altered.

In a recent Gallup Poll, 31 percent of respondents said they favored such an amendment, compared with 28 percent in the summer. The pollsters mentioned Schwarzenegger to half of the respondents, and that produced a slightly higher favorable response: 39 percent said they favored an amendment when Schwarzenegger’s name was included.

I'm African?

Sounds like there will be a lot more reparations than we thought.

There are some American-born TFP members that are pretty up-front about despising America. And some adults who were born here who still can't speak English.

I'd say that being born here isn't a great qualification to be president anymore.

I support such an amendment, but not because I necessarily support Arnold. Here is how I would lay it out:

<li>10 to 20 years before the Amendment takes effect (thanks for the idea BOR, I think it's a good one.)
<li>30 years of full singular US citizenship. Periods of dual citizenship do not count.
<li>all other presidential requirements already set out (i.e. 35 years of age)

I say that we should amend the Constitution so that any one that has been a citizen for 35 years can become President.