With buzz of who's going to contend for the 2012 presidency, let's look at the requirements posted in the Constitution.
"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."
Tl;Dr:
1. Be a natural born Citizen, as in being born in the United States.
2. Be 35 years old.
3. Be a permanent resident of the United States for 14 years.
With the 22nd Amendment-
4. You can't be elected more than twice (Something that I disagree with; If voters decide the President has done a good job, why should they not reelect him? I also didn't mind for Bloomberg's third term, since I believe it is up to the voters to decide whether someone should stay in power or not. The argument for a monarchy is frivolous as voters can vote them out; however, the argument for excessive power is not, as history shows there has been quite an abuse of power. I'd recommend limiting presidential powers to combat this).
All serious matters aside, there are some things that people take into account when deciding if a runner is qualified. These can include, but are not limited to:
1. Ideology
2. Public Experience
3. Charisma
4. Voting for the lesser of two evils*
*It seems that this is the trend during the last 4 years.
I'll discuss the potentials of prospective candidates as more information is revealed.
I find the requirements to be outdated. There are worthy foreign born people that shoul be able to run for president. This is especially true seeing how the last several presidents haven't been doing particularly great jobs. I also agree with the fact that presidents should be reelected as many times as the people choose. If one president has a lot of success it should continue until he loses it.
ReplyDelete