2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

y0ssar1an22

feargale wrote: »

Here is an extract:

"I just heard that, I heard it today, that she doesn’t meet the requirements,” he said. “I have no idea if that’s right. I would have assumed the Democrats would have checked it before she gets chosen to run for vice president. But that’s a very serious ….You’re saying that they’re saying that she doesn’t qualify because she wasn’t born in this country?”

Ms Trump’s comments come on the back of a widely-circulated opinion piece by conservative law academic John Eastman in Newsweek magazine. The article questions whether Ms Harris is eligible to become vice president or president under the US constitution, claiming that neither her father or mother was a naturalised US citizen at the time of her birth in 1964.

The article argues that, before voters “so cavalierly accept senator Harris’ eligibility” questions should be posed “about the status of her parents at the time of her birth.”



Decide for yourself. You can put your hand on your heart and assert that the Great Liar's hand is not in it. Some will believe you without question, and others, albeit without hard and fast evidence right now, in the light of the similarly racist slur on Obama, will wonder. At least it came from the "conservatives.

There is no more justification for raising this than there is for questioning the status of Eastman's parents the night he was conceived.

this is what i cant understand, regardless of what side you're on. an opinion piece? either they were or they were not. that should be easy to ascertain.

look at her DOB, look when the parents were naturalised. put the story to bed one way or another.

TheRepentent

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Sadly , because of the recent change in the law. They are legally entitled to challenge you , refusal could lead to you being prevented from Voting..

Seriously ? Fuk that..land of the free* my arse




*whites only need apply

Timberrrrrrrr

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Sadly , because of the recent change in the law. They are legally entitled to challenge you , refusal could lead to you being prevented from Voting..



So basically - they are allowed be in the polling station and randomly pick people out and demand that they prove their eligibility to vote. I think we all know exactly where these "Poll monitors" will be and what type of people they will be targeting.

Thats disgraceful, Could Dems do the same and confront white people?

Quin_Dub

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

this is what i cant understand, regardless of what side you're on. an opinion piece? either they were or they were not. that should be easy to ascertain.

look at her DOB, look when the parents were naturalised. put the story to bed one way or another.

It doesn't matter - She was born in California so she's an American citizen and qualified. , end of discussion.

Her Parents status is utterly irrelevant - The status of parents only matters if you are born outside the US , like Ted Cruz for example.

She's not white so they question if she's "really" American.. The fact that she's even being asked to verify and confirm this stuff is beyond pathetic.

If she was white and had European born parents , the question would never even have been asked.

Quin_Dub

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Thats disgraceful, Could Dems do the same and confront white people?

Technically yes and they have always been allowed , the GOP have been banned from doing it since the early '70's having been found to be guilty of extreme voter intimidation and other illegal practices.

They finally got the ban overturned in 2018 (after the mid terms) so this will be the 1st time in almost 50 years that they've been allowed to have monitors.

They are planning to go whole hog with it in all the places that they feel are "Hotbeds for voter fraud" which are, in surprise to no one , predominantly Democrat , mainly Black/Hispanic voting districts.

Timberrrrrrrr

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Technically yes and they have always been allowed , the GOP have been banned from doing it since the early '70's having been found to be guilty of extreme voter intimidation and other illegal practices.

They finally got the ban overturned in 2018 (after the mid terms) so this will be the 1st time in almost 50 years that they've been allowed to have monitors.

They are planning to go whole hog with it in all the places that they feel are "Hotbeds for voter fraud" which are, in surprise to no one , predominantly Democrat , mainly Black/Hispanic voting districts.

And Trumps zealots will defend this despicable behaviour because their dear leader says so.

drunkmonkey

Dr. Siegel tells Tucker Carlson there is 'no science' behind Biden's mask mandate
Siegel called it 'the politics of fear'

Media not buying it after all, I'm sure CNN will retort later to say everyone is going to die if they don't listen to Professor Biden.

y0ssar1an22

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It doesn't matter - She was born in California so she's an American citizen and qualified. , end of discussion.

Her Parents status is utterly irrelevant - The status of parents only matters if you are born outside the US , like Ted Cruz for example.

She's not white so they question if she's "really" American.. The fact that she's even being asked to verify and confirm this stuff is beyond pathetic.

If she was white and had European born parents , the question would never even have been asked.

my bad so. just picked up on this part:

claiming that neither her father or mother was a naturalised US citizen at the time of her birth in 1964.

here are the criteria (per wikipedia):

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for holding the presidency. To serve as president, one must:

be a natural-born U.S. citizen of the United States;
be at least 35 years old;
be a resident in the United States for at least 14 years.[1]
A person who meets the above qualifications would, however, still be disqualified from holding the office of president under any of the following conditions:

[cut out - things like treason, irrelevant here though]


there is a question about a natural-born U.S. citizen of the United States, as its not defined in the constitution which is what yer man was angling at i presume:
The U.S. Constitution uses but does not define the phrase "natural born Citizen".
the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the question of a specific presidential or vice-presidential candidate's eligibility as a natural-born citizen.


but thats soooo far reaching, its almost embarrassing. just get on with the various campaigns. attack her policies if you want, this is just desperate!

drunkmonkey

Quin_Dub wrote: »

If she was white and had European born parents , the question would never even have been asked.

Arnold Schwarzenegger can't run for president and he has European parents.

Timberrrrrrrr

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Arnold Schwarzenegger can't run for president and he has European parents.

He was born in Austria.

y0ssar1an22

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Dr. Siegel tells Tucker Carlson there is 'no science' behind Biden's mask mandate
Siegel called it 'the politics of fear'

Media not buying it after all, I'm sure CNN will retort later to say everyone is going to die if they don't listen to Professor Biden.

this i don't get (along with a lot more!). biden's proposed policy is the exact same as trumps - it will be the individual states that will decide.

duploelabs

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Arnold Schwarzenegger can't run for president and he has European parents.

He wasn't born in the United States either, Harris was

Quin_Dub

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

my bad so. just picked up on this part:

claiming that neither her father or mother was a naturalised US citizen at the time of her birth in 1964.

here are the criteria (per wikipedia):

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for holding the presidency. To serve as president, one must:

be a natural-born U.S. citizen of the United States;
be at least 35 years old;
be a resident in the United States for at least 14 years.[1]
A person who meets the above qualifications would, however, still be disqualified from holding the office of president under any of the following conditions:

[cut out - things like treason, irrelevant here though]


there is a question about a natural-born U.S. citizen of the United States, as its not defined in the constitution which is what yer man was angling at i presume:
The U.S. Constitution uses but does not define the phrase "natural born Citizen".
the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the question of a specific presidential or vice-presidential candidate's eligibility as a natural-born citizen.


buts that soooo far reaching, its almost embarrassing. just get on with the various campaigns. attack her policies if you want, this is just desperate!

Exactly , If her name was Patricia O'Malley and her parents Paudie and Majella had emigrated to California from Ballyjamesduff, County Cavan in 1964 not a single person would have raised this question.

It's the fundamental racism of the GOP - the only "real" Americans are WASP's (with the WHITE bit being the most critical) , everyone else is subject to suspicion.

It's the same line of thinking that has Trump telling "the Squad" to go back to where they came from despite the fact that 3 out of 4 were born in the US and in the case of Ayanna Pressley her family have been in the US longer than Trumps.

Kidchameleon

namloc1980 wrote: »

I like the way you inserted ... instead of quoting him further. Nice tactic. "I just heard it today that she doesn't meet the requirements

and by the way the lawyer that wrote that piece is a very highly qualified, very talented lawyer." Immediately he's trying to lend credence to the issue and put it out

there.

"But that's a very serious, you're saying that, they're saying that she doesn't qualify because she wasn't born in this country." He was corrected on this point and

then he quickly moved on. Why would he say such a blatant lie other than to stoke the flames of this conspiracy theory. He just stood there and bold faced lied that

she wasn't born in the country.

Oh really? You like the way I inserted the ... do you? That's strange because I copied and pasted it exactly as is from, wait for it... YOUR POST!

Go ahead and have a look, post #1568 :rolleyes:

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Dr. Siegel tells Tucker Carlson there is 'no science' behind Biden's mask mandate
Siegel called it 'the politics of fear'

Media not buying it after all, I'm sure CNN will retort later to say everyone is going to die if they don't listen to Professor Biden.

It wouldn't exactly surprise anyone for Tucker and Co to be discouraging the use of masks. Meanwhile both the WHO, CDC and governments across the globe recommend the use of them. And contrary to what you were saying, it is unlikely to increase your risk of getting the virus and in all likelihood does reduce the risk of getting it.

The same Siegel is also urging schools to reopen in the US which isn't exactly the wisest atm.

drunkmonkey

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

this i don't get (along with a lot more!). biden's proposed policy is the exact same as trumps - it will be the individual states that will decide.

Biden clearly called for nationwide mandatory masks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_AjBoZ40iw

y0ssar1an22

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Exactly , If her name was Patricia O'Malley and her parents Paudie and Majella had emigrated to California from Ballyjamesduff, County Cavan in 1964 not a single person would have raised this question.

It's the fundamental racism of the GOP - the only "real" Americans are WASP's (with the WHITE bit being the most critical) , everyone else is subject to suspicion.

It's the same line of thinking that has Trump telling "the Squad" to go back to where they came from despite the fact that 3 out of 4 were born in the US and in the case of Ayanna Pressley her family have been in the US longer than Trumps.

its not racist, its politics.

surely you can draw that distinction? try to discredit an opponent, par for the course really.

y0ssar1an22

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

its not racist, its politics.

surely you can draw that distinction? try to discredit an opponent, par for the course really.

I would say it's playing to the racist audience in politics so it is in fact racist. They don't to be up in arms with white candidates about their nationality. It also heavily overlaps with the conspiracy theory crowd.

drunkmonkey

Deleted User wrote: »

It wouldn't exactly surprise anyone for Tucker and Co to be discouraging the use of masks. Meanwhile both the WHO, CDC and governments across the globe recommend the use of them. And contrary to what you were saying, it is unlikely to increase your risk of getting the virus and in all likelihood does reduce the risk of getting it.

No I don't say it increaces the risk the professor said it appeared to. You've been shown there is 0 evidence of any worthwhile benefit in current government policy here.
Anyway cases are going up, stay tuned.

Kidchameleon

Hoop66 wrote: »

"I have no idea if that's right".

But I'm certainly going to mention it during a presidential press conference.

If you can defend this sort of behaviour there is something wrong with you.

He didn't "mention" it. He was asked the question by a reporter.

y0ssar1an22

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Biden clearly called for nationwide mandatory masks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_AjBoZ40iw

do you have the rest of that clip, cos i'm nearly certain he caveats it by saying it will be up to the states to decide themselves.

y0ssar1an22

Deleted User wrote: »

I would say it's playing to the racist audience in politics so it is in fact racist. They don't to be up in arms with white candidates about their nationality. It also heavily overlaps with the conspiracy theory crowd.

how many racists do you think are in america?

Quin_Dub

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

its not racist, its politics.

surely you can draw that distinction? try to discredit an opponent, par for the course really.

So why wasn't it used to question Ted Cruz eligibility then - His father is Cuban and Ted was born in Canada??

Or John McCain - He was born in Panama?

Why is it only the Black people that get asked this question?

Why did Trump tell women of colour "to go back to where they came from" when they are American?

There's a theme here...And it isn't "politics"

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I would say it's playing to the racist audience in politics so it is in fact racist. They don't to be up in arms with white candidates about their nationality. It also heavily overlaps with the conspiracy theory crowd.

Not a peep out of them that Trumps wife is an immigrant.

drunkmonkey

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

do you have the rest of that clip, cos i'm nearly certain he caveats it by saying it will be up to the states to decide themselves.

That's not what he said, he called for mandatory outside masks nationally and then asked all states to do it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/13/us/politics/wear-masks-mandate-biden.html

Outside Masks, they want them here as well, there is no science to support that kind of a blanket policy. It's politics and it's wrong for people to blindly accept such BS without question.

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

No I don't say it increaces the risk the professor said it appeared to. You've been shown there is 0 evidence of any worthwhile benefit in current government policy here.
Anyway cases are going up, stay tuned.

Thing is, we do have evidence in terms of research but you've chosen to reject it. We have enough to make a conclusion that it's worth wearing them because it has significant potential to reduce the spread. Masks amount to an inconvenience. I'd also tend to trust the words of virologists and immunologists more than doctors who are fox news pundits.

y0ssar1an22

Quin_Dub wrote: »

So why wasn't it used to question Ted Cruz eligibility then - His father is Cuban and Ted was born in Canada??

Or John McCain - He was born in Panama?

Why is it only the Black people that get asked this question?

Why did Trump tell women of colour "to go back to where they came from" when they are American?

There's a theme here...And it isn't "politics"

i suppose you can make an argument for cruz in the 2016 primaries alright, if trump didn't do the same to him:

Cruz's eligibility was questioned by some of his primary opponents, including Donald Trump

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-cruz-clash-over-eligibility-new-york-values-at-gop-debate

drunkmonkey

Deleted User wrote: »

Thing is, we do have evidence in terms of research but you've chosen to reject it. We have enough to make a conclusion that it's worth wearing them because it has significant potential to reduce the spread. Masks amount to an inconvenience. I'd also tend to trust the words of virologists and immunologists more than doctors who are fox news pundits.

So you think Biden is right to ask for masks outdoors? You back his science references?
Your the one not prepared to accept the science does not back up current government policy it was a knee jerk reaction to the media by politicans now we have the same nonsense from Biden and you'll support it, unbelievable.

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So you think Biden is right to ask for masks outdoors? You back his science references?
Your the one not prepared to accept the science does not back up current government policy it was a knee jerk reaction to the media by politicans now we have the same nonsense from Biden and you'll support it, unbelievable.

I would say given the infection rates that it wouldn't be a bad idea for them to be made mandatory outdoors in densely populated areas. Unbelievable, I know. Fauci said similar in relation to protests so seems applicable to any cities. I'd trust his science credentials more than yours.

Quin_Dub

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

i suppose you can make an argument for cruz in the 2016 primaries alright, if trump didn't do the same to him:

Cruz's eligibility was questioned by some of his primary opponents, including Donald Trump

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-cruz-clash-over-eligibility-new-york-values-at-gop-debate

Did Trump send Private Investigators to Cuba and Canada looking for his birth cert?

Did the whole GOP and Fox News spend 2 years banging on about it demanding that Cruz release the long-form version of his birth-cert to prove his claims?

Or did they only do that to the Black guy?

Does Trump tell Nancy Pelosi to "go back to where she came from" when she gets under his skin or does he only say that to the Black women?


Here's the thing the GOP fueled by Fox News have spent decades telling their supporters to fear "different" to fear "the other"

They have invested massively in telling their supporters that anyone that doesn't have the same beliefs as them , anyone that doesn't look,act and sound like them is a threat to their very existence.

"They are going to take your guns" , "They are going to take away religion" , "They are going to Destroy Suburbia" , "The WAR on Christmas" on and on and on and on, ad infinitum.

Call it Racism , call it Xenophobia , call it Sectarianism - Call it whatever you like.

It's the Politics of hate and fear.

To the GOP, anyone that is different is not someone to find common ground with - They are a mortal enemy.