Biden popularity

[foszoe]

View attachment 128270

Makes no point, offers a personal insult, doesn't show respect.

You should get lots of likes!

 

[IndyDave1776]

Makes no point, offers a personal insult, doesn't show respect.

You should get lots of likes!

Supports opposition to constitutional rights, circumventing constitutional requirements, and supports highly destructive domestic enemies doing proxy work for foreign enemies. Should be a hit at Mother Jones.

 

[ultra...good]

Makes no point, offers a personal insult, doesn't show respect.

You should get lots of likes!

Yeah, but when you're right, you're right.

 

[foszoe]

Supports opposition to constitutional rights, circumventing constitutional requirements, and supports highly destructive domestic enemies doing proxy work for foreign enemies. Should be a hit at Mother Jones.

More! Please continue!

 

[jamil]

Makes no point, offers a personal insult, doesn't show respect.

You should get lots of likes!

You complain often enough that people mistake you for "the other". You don't really give them a lot of reason not to. Like this whole "birth certificate" thing. There isn't really a point to it. It's just being disagreeable for the sake of disagreement. When "Haitin'" brought up the birth certificate thing, if you don't agree with that general sentiment, you could have just said that. Why make some non-point about that the specific words about requiring a birth certificate isn't in the constitution.

DD said something about that it wasn't necessary to have a constitutional amendment requiring it. It's not. One must be a citizen by birth to be a US president or vice President. A birth certificate is one way to prove birth citizenship. Not the only way, but probably the best way by today's standards, because every US citizen by birth, now has a birth certificate. So what is so controversial about that?

 

[IndyDave1776]

More! Please continue!

No need. It's clear you're carrying water for the other team.

 

[jamil]

More! Please continue!

See? You say stuff using terms you know people will take a certain way, and then you help them continue to think it. And at some point you'll complain that they're misjudging you. Just have a conversation. It's even okay to disagree. What's wrong with just being straight up?

 

[jamil]

No need. It's clear you're carrying water for the other team.

No. He's ****ing with you.

 

[jbombelli]

No. He's ****ing with you.

And he does it so much that nobody really knows where he stands on practically anything.

 

[AIRDOO]

And he does it so much that nobody really knows where he stands on practically anything.

or cares

 

[Twangbanger]

It's ok. After a few years of Democrat rule, their navi will re-initialize, and they'll figure out who their real enemy is.

But antagonizing Trump voters just for the sake of it is dumb. Because once the memory of Orange Man has faded, and all that's left is Democrat rule, you're going to need some help throwing off the yoke. All this continued Trump Derangement is just further convincing them that four years of Nikki Haley will be like four years of listening to Fozo. And a lot of them aren't going to see the point of voting for it.

Hell, I'm not sure I want to. If enough Trump voters come to feel that way, it could get interesting. There are not enough "traditional conservatives" left to win elections against the kind of machine we saw in Georgia. You are going to need every oar pulling together to have a chance.

Either TDS'ers have to learn to concede that Trump voters have a point, their viewpoint needs to be respected, and generally just rub some Prep-H on their butts and get over it, or this tennis match is probably already over, and we just don't know it yet.

If they really believe they're the bigger man, I've yet to see any evidence of it.

 

[BugI02]

Hmm if you meet the requirements, can the state deny you to run for president?

You have a right to free speech but it comes with limitations. Thise limitations are requirements you must meet in order to be covered by free speech

Does the constitution enumerate those limitations? I don't recall it mentioning shouting fire in a crowded theatre. Is it possible the constitution references requirements but doesn't specify how to meet them - like saying must be a natural born citizen without specifying the need to show a birth certificate? Or like saying the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed without specifying which arms? I'm sensing a pattern, here

 

[BugI02]

Does the constitution require a president to produce a birth certificate?

It's a yes or no question.

The requirements of the constitution itself have applied to every president. Under the constitution they should all be treated the same.

I picked a source I knew you would like

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/07/there-was-a-very-real-birther-debate-about-john-mccain/

Before the President Obama "birther" controversy and long before the Ted Cruz version, there was John McCain.

Obama was not the first, and it wasn't about racism - it was about constitutional eligibility. If you don't remember, the law giving citizenship to Americans born in the canal zone did not pass until 1937, and McCain was born in 1936. The issue was that his citizenship was already established by conditions in effect at the time of his birth, the law was not retroactive

 

[actaeon277]

Should I watch the original again?

I'd rather watch the orig.
But then, I haven't watched the reboot.

 

[BugI02]

Redirect Notice

images.app.goo.gl

Do you understand that George Washington was not a natural born citizen of the United States?

 

[BugI02]

Makes no point, offers a personal insult, doesn't show respect.

You should get lots of likes!

Respect is earned

 

[IndyDave1776]

No. He's ****ing with you.

If so he has no right to complain about me taking him at his word.

 

[churchmouse]

No. He's ****ing with you.

And fellas I have openly stated that this crap will come to an end when we are deep in the clutches of these discussions. It was said in the open and I ment it for "ALL" involved.

Let Foz step just a wee bit more toward that trollish line and his time here will be over. For good. Stirring crap just for the sake of stirring crap is no longer tolerated and this goes for all of you. Bot sides of the debate.
I am weary of the reports/the childish responses and behaviors.
I know its tough but come on peoples.......make your point. In the open and get ready to defend it.

 

[Chewie]

To answer your question no.

He did produce a birth certificate.

The theories that said he wasn't a citizen couldn't even agree with each other.

I go back to my point though.

Does the constitution require a birth certificate to be produced? Do you believe it does? If it is a requirement then every president should have done it prior to Obama and Obama would have to prove citizenship.

If you don't the burden of proof falls to the accusers to prove their case. With multiple disagreements between those who said he didn't meet the requirement I'm their theories, that's enough to make them suspect.

Finally during that time, didn't Republicans try to pass legislation requiring a birth certificate?

If the Constitution required it then legislation would not be necessary. At the very least it can seem Republicans tacitly acknowledged there was no requirement to produce one under the constitution

Actually a certificate of live birth was provided after many months of arguing, not a birth certificate. They are not the same.

 

[Chewie]

No. Driving is a privilege not a right. It's also a state issue not a federal one.

Should you have to provide you are a Citizen in good standing to purchase a firearm? Ammo?

A secure dl is available requiring a birth certificate or valid passport and several other forms of ID.