Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

former9thward

(31,805 posts)
55. Sure
Sun Dec 25, 2016, 09:24 PM
Dec 2016

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.

ARTICLE II, SECTION 1, CLAUSE 5

You have to be 35, natural born, and 14 years a resident. Period. Nothing about having to release tax returns or anything else.

WOW! Way to FIGHT BACK, CALIFORNIA! Cha Dec 2016 #1
Yes, Cha! Hope more States will follow. We must never have a pres candidate w/o their taxes! Madam45for2923 Dec 2016 #2
NEVER! Because we can't EVER Depend on Media****** for Cha Dec 2016 #3
Exactly. The media became an arm of the KGB this cycle, no bones about it LaydeeBug Dec 2016 #59
major media tidbit tonight in DC here wordpix Dec 2016 #71
I seriously doubt Trump will run for re-election if he manages to finish his first term. maddiemom Dec 2016 #13
I seriously doubt tRump will finish his first term meow2u3 Dec 2016 #46
Add "resign out of frustration" jmowreader Dec 2016 #47
Congress is full of money grubbing Trumpists so don't count on them to uphold the Constit. wordpix Dec 2016 #69
Seriously, this Congress hold the line? I doubt it ... LenaBaby61 Dec 2016 #87
candidates should get a psycho test to, yortsed snacilbuper Dec 2016 #4
Right on! LongTomH Dec 2016 #21
Medical and drug too evilhime Dec 2016 #33
Hitler was a speed freak freak zippythepinhead Dec 2016 #51
Unconstitutional. I think every Court would invalidate the law. yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #5
Under what reasoning? NobodyHere Dec 2016 #6
What in the constitution prevents this? Thor_MN Dec 2016 #10
This would provide a limitation not in the Constitution. former9thward Dec 2016 #45
Nonsense. Ballot access is set at the state level. Thor_MN Dec 2016 #54
Sure former9thward Dec 2016 #55
Where is the language that prevents states from setting ballot access laws? Thor_MN Dec 2016 #56
Nothin, quite the opposite, see my post below re Article II Section I stevenleser Dec 2016 #61
So you are claiming that anyone who is 35, natural born and 14 years a resident can appear on the whopis01 Dec 2016 #62
Do you think a state could pass a law saying a Presidential candidate has to be 45? former9thward Dec 2016 #64
To answer that question you have to start with what he Constitution says regarding thr stevenleser Dec 2016 #67
No. You seem rather confused by what I wrote. whopis01 Dec 2016 #101
Nope, read Article II section I. Voters are voting to select electors and Article II Section I stevenleser Dec 2016 #60
What does appointing electors have to do with requiring a candidate former9thward Dec 2016 #66
Because that is what the election is for in each state. You are not voting for President stevenleser Dec 2016 #68
I know how electors are chosen and what their role is. former9thward Dec 2016 #73
I already answered that question above. But to be clear... stevenleser Dec 2016 #75
There are already requirements DK504 Dec 2016 #11
If applied to all federal elections... mwooldri Dec 2016 #39
Bull shit Emilybemily Dec 2016 #41
Yeah... 40degreesflaps Dec 2016 #42
Nope, the Constitution grants state legislatures the power to do this and stevenleser Dec 2016 #63
But If... 40degreesflaps Dec 2016 #88
It's worth the effort... Rollo Dec 2016 #100
California is the only state that requires charities (501 C's) to file Schedule B's of their 990 underpants Dec 2016 #52
CA under Jerry Brown looks better all the time wordpix Dec 2016 #74
Additional qualifications on president not stated in the Contitution MichMan Dec 2016 #7
It wouldn't be an additional qualification on being President dumbcat Dec 2016 #17
Yeah, but he was never going to win California even if he was on the ballot. milestogo Dec 2016 #8
I think this analysys misses a couple tricks quakerboy Dec 2016 #49
I like the concept JustAnotherGen Dec 2016 #9
Boom goes the dynamite lark Dec 2016 #12
Is there a Lawyer in the house? safeinOhio Dec 2016 #14
This sounds like a good idea! Madam45for2923 Dec 2016 #24
Not likely that a court would order disclosure of his tax returns. Jim Lane Dec 2016 #35
i think this is possible constitutionally, but republicans write off california anyway. unblock Dec 2016 #15
They can write off states, but if they don't show up on the ballot in those states, it will be Squinch Dec 2016 #29
I like it - but, go a step further packman Dec 2016 #16
Great idea! treestar Dec 2016 #18
Every State That Has A Dem Legislature Should Do The Same... global1 Dec 2016 #19
And every state with a RePug legislature dumbcat Dec 2016 #26
That would be great! revmclaren Dec 2016 #30
NICE !!! I don't see how they fight this in court!!! uponit7771 Dec 2016 #20
"... not the best interests of any business venture or investment fund." mahatmakanejeeves Dec 2016 #22
I applaud them - but it's all for naught as long as the Electoral College decides. tenorly Dec 2016 #23
If they are not on the state ballet, they do not get the states electoral votes. revmclaren Dec 2016 #31
Sure. But I doubt we'll ever see bills like this from red/swing states (where it could cost the GOP) tenorly Dec 2016 #34
every blue state should consider similar laws tied for all running in all primary and main elections beachbum bob Dec 2016 #25
They should require all medical records and college papers hughee99 Dec 2016 #27
hell why not make a requirement that unless every single party candidate released full disclosure beachbum bob Dec 2016 #28
Pass This In Florida OldYallow Dec 2016 #32
In this state run and for republicans??? mitch96 Dec 2016 #36
All the blue states need to do this. He won't be on their ballots for 2020. OregonBlue Dec 2016 #37
Does it really matter? AllenJordan Dec 2016 #38
Im pretty sure Trump will simply say, "FU CA, I don't need you to win" aikoaiko Dec 2016 #40
This will be fun to watch Gothmog Dec 2016 #43
Primaries are fairly new and the party could go the convention route, if CK_John Dec 2016 #44
This is a good idea, but it won't work... Mike Nelson Dec 2016 #48
See Article II Section I of the Constitution regarding the choosing of electors. nt stevenleser Dec 2016 #65
the law proposed is a state law wordpix Dec 2016 #76
McMullin couldn't get on many states' ballots because of state laws Ilsa Dec 2016 #50
Love it. When its put on the ballot here in Cali, I will be voting YES on it nt iluvtennis Dec 2016 #53
great idea! yurbud Dec 2016 #57
That will certainly dash Trump's chances of winning California in 2020. fescuerescue Dec 2016 #58
It's a fun concept to think about, but briv1016 Dec 2016 #70
Nope, that Federal law would be Unconstitutional. stevenleser Dec 2016 #72
But they can use the Voting Rights Act as precedent to pass the law. briv1016 Dec 2016 #77
Nope, they can't. Similar to what i said to someone else above, restrictions on the stevenleser Dec 2016 #79
I'm not disagreeing with you. briv1016 Dec 2016 #84
Obama needs to issue an EO to put Garland on the bench wordpix Dec 2016 #81
your argument that choosing electors equals CA requiring tax disclosure doesn't work wordpix Dec 2016 #78
Nope, it would be a simple law, to wit: stevenleser Dec 2016 #80
OK I'm seeing it. On edit: wordpix Dec 2016 #83
Yep. What came out in the 2000 recount is that this is one of those ticking timebombs in the stevenleser Dec 2016 #86
Love it! Great idea! InAbLuEsTaTe Dec 2016 #82
"Make transparency great again. Great line, I'm gonna use it locally wordpix Dec 2016 #85
Love that saying crazycatlady Dec 2016 #98
And The GOP Response Would Be DallasNE Dec 2016 #89
has to happen in red states, NY and CA won't matter. It's winner take all, remember. n/t Hamlette Dec 2016 #90
If we can't all move to California, efhmc Dec 2016 #91
Would this apply to primaries as well? temporary311 Dec 2016 #92
Not sure! Makes sense to start from the primaries. We need transparency starting then. Madam45for2923 Dec 2016 #94
What about demanding this information before . . . MrModerate Dec 2016 #93
States don't have airspace. All US airspace is governed and controlled by the FAA. Calista241 Dec 2016 #95
Air Traffic Control mostly sits in California. n/t MrModerate Dec 2016 #99
Blue California will save our nation. oasis Dec 2016 #96
K & R Scurrilous Dec 2016 #97
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Trumps refusal to disclo...»Reply #55