Arnold Schwarzenegger for President of the USA ?

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:58 am

55% so far in the vote say YES .. heaven help us ...

Though compared to Cheney, he would be PERFECT

p.s. Faceless, maybe this should be in the Galloway forum as it is political.

Post by **faceless** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:07 am

I'd say iit's more fantasy novel than political story though...as he can't be president unless they change the rules to let someone born outside the country to run for it.

6ULDV8 · Post by **6ULDV8** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:10 am

Could never happen due to his birth place...

This is one time I'd agree that this rule is a good one.

I was suprised when he even managed to get his spot as a gov'...

Not being born here in the USA myself, I could be a commish' of a small town, even a mayor, but after that it's a no go situation.

Would the UK allow damn Edna to be PM?
I think not.
Not because Edna isn't right for the job (nor in the head) nor a real woman... Edna just wasn't born in the UK.
Same rule as far as Arnie in the USA.

Nothing stopping the queen from breeding with those from outside of the UK, as she & her children were born in the UK.
With this in mind, maybe Arnie's kids would have a chance of becoming pres' if they were to follow in his footsteps.

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:16 am

Wasn't there a discussion on altering the constitution (or the rules at least in California) to allow him to run [or was that an old change to allow him to run for governor] ?

Post by **faceless** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:18 am

being perfectly honest I think he's actually done a fair bit for California from the bits and pieces I've read. He doesn't seem to kill many of his constituents in the electric-chair, which is always a good sign...

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:19 am

6ULDV8 wrote: Would the UK allow damn Edna to be PM?
I think not.
Not because Edna isn't right for the job (nor in the head) nor a real woman... Edna just wasn't born in the UK.

Actually, I don't think there is such a rule. I think anyone (who doesn't have a criminal record) can stand for Parliament, and then can get voted as PM. It definitely is NOT birth place dependent (though may be residency dependent, but residency can be granted irrespective of birth).

Post by **eefanincan** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:32 am

faceless wrote:being perfectly honest I think he's actually done a fair bit for California from the bits and pieces I've read. He doesn't seem to kill many of his constituents in the electric-chair, which is always a good sign...

I was actually thinking that myself.....I mean, I'm not a real "fan" of his, but most people seem to like him. What I can't understand about him though, is he's all about promoting fitness,etc. yet you frequently see him with a cigar hanging out his mouth. Even if he's not smoking it, I don't think that's sending a consistent message.

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:41 am

Whilst I used to like Arnie the actor (Terminator etc.), ny I my views on him went down hill fast after "True Lies" which was anti-muslim propaganda.

Post by **Skylace** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:28 pm

To my knowledge most States don't have the birth place law in effect for their political offices, hell, they don't even have species clauses in effect. There are governors that are goats or other wildlife. So, that's not an issue.
For him to become Prez the US Constitution would have to be changed and I don't see them trying to do that just for Arnold.

pirtybirdy · Post by **pirtybirdy** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:00 pm

I like Arnold, but I don't want the constitution changed. We already have people here by birth who have no "love of country". I'm big on Nationalism and Patriotism for one's country. I know many people outside of this country don't understand that. I don't want the constitution changed ever to allow someone who wasn't born here to hold the highest office. Although I think Arnold truly likes this country and would do right by it, it's not Arnold I'm worried about. That's my two cents added. ;-)

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 10:36 am

pirtybirdy wrote:I like Arnold, but I don't want the constitution changed. We already have people here by birth who have no "love of country". I'm big on Nationalism and Patriotism for one's country. I know many people outside of this country don't understand that. I don't want the constitution changed ever to allow someone who wasn't born here to hold the highest office. Although I think Arnold truly likes this country and would do right by it, it's not Arnold I'm worried about. That's my two cents added. ;-)

I agree. Reminds me of the argument that the reason we shouldn't allow draconian powers to be held by people is that we never know who will come afterwards and abuse these powers. That's why the US constitution is so important to uphold (and why the powers that be now fear all talk about the constitution "that god-damn piece of paper")

alan1254 · Post by **alan1254** » Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:12 am

'The Presinator' like it, he is an astoundingly determined man, and for better or worse i think he would not sit on the fence i think he would go for it and get things done , he is a very well respected businessman , who has been very clever in the real estate game, i think he is proberbly slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun politically, but i could see the US entertaining the idea of changing the constitution to let him in

archie_f · Post by **archie_f** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 7:51 pm

The problem with Arnold,I think, would be similar to Reagan and Bush. Would we be really dealing with an individual with ideas , vision and policies of his own or as with Reagan an actor who spoke well but was only a spokesman for the real policy-makers? Bush has been a complete disaster because of his complete ignorance of the English language but he is after all only the neo-con spokesman. With Arnie, besides the fact that he is very far right, what does he really stand for and who are the people who will determine policy issues for him? Being a "successful" Gorverner does not translate into a successful President as Bush has so disastrously illustrated!