We should impose these requirements for presidential candidates
- Thread starter CarolinaHawkeye
- Start date
The 20 years of tax returns seems a bit excessive and who keeps 20 years of tax returns anyway? All the rest seems fair.
The IRS, just have them automatically released for anyone filing to run for office.
That would be the trouble with a psychological evaluation. It can be somewhat subjective right?
The Deep State
I don't think a pyschological test would be doable. But tax returns are absolutely impartial. Security clearance is impartial. And while a government knowledge test can be subjective, we still require every new citizen to pass one, so that is fair game.
Outside of a valid Hawaiian birth certificate, you mean? What else would you like to see?
Unnecessary, because the voters always research their candidates and make an informed choice in voting for qualified candidates. Oh, wait . . . . . . .
Bro, JFC. Get your shit together.
i don’t know. There was a lot of pissing and moaning, I just wasn’t sure if everybody was satisfied at the end of the day.
Most people don’t follow this crap 24/7 like the pants shitters around here do.
Because Birthers are idiots.
I thought they kept them indefinitely but google tells me 10 years. So change that to 10 years.
https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/how-many-years-does-irs-keep-records--632852.html
IRS will provide transcripts for 3 years, and hard copies of the actual return for at least 6 years. But I can't believe they don't have 20+ years scanned somewhere, even going back to microfiche.
They're currently trying to track me down. They've reviewed my tax return and if I don't send some Wal Mart gift cards in the mail I'm probably going to prison. You think $200 in WM gift cards is enough?
Of course you're right. That's why we have Trump.
20 years is way too much. IRS only requires you to keep 7, so what's the point? Psych eval is also pretty dicey.
Hmmm... so Trump, who is the ultimate authority on who does or does not get a security clearance, could simply refuse to give one to any challenging candidate.
You guys don't look too far ahead, do you?
You guys don't look too far ahead, do you?
This is really the only way you can defend Trump anymore, isn't it? You look for loopholes and typos and grammatical errors because it's all you have.
LOL... you have a Putin sympathizer in the White House and you're concerned with fake birth certificate news.
Under these rules, Trump would have never been allowed to become President in the first place.
It could be any president who wanted to use the security apparatus to get rid of a challenger.
It's a tradition on here for right wingers to not to look too far ahead.
For the other right winger who questioned Obama's birth, I didn't realize there were still people out there that weren't aware that you either have a birth certificate or you don't. If as he suggests there may be more proof needed, then it looks like I'm screwed too.
President Smith is running for re-election. Candidate Jones appears to be a strong candidate. When Jones applies for a security clearance, President Smith ensures that the clearance is denied. Jones is now ineligible to run against Smith.
I don't know if you get this, but you just admitted that this new rule would backfire because Trump would use it to prevent anyone else from becoming President.
To me, this shows that you really do understand what kind of man Trump is. Your natural instinct is to assume that Trump would undo the Constitutional limits to declare himself ruler for life. Nobody else brought up this point. It is where your mind naturally drifted. That Trump would effectively use the rule to become a dictator.
I guess, at this point, I am left wondering why you continue to support Trump when this is your assumption of how he works?
Exactly. Your argument is that Trump would stop our election process in its tracks. That he would literally prevent anyone from challenging him so that elections are not allowed to take place at all.
