Author Topic: Trump Voters.... why?  (Read 296884 times)

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3493
  • Age: 94
  • Location: Upper left corner
  • FI(lean) working on the "RE"
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #600 on: October 03, 2016, 10:11:56 AM »
It really is laughable that people are voting for "who is worse" when one of the candidates is so obscenely more qualified than the other in every possible respect. People who think that there is a limit to how bad Trump can be have no appreciation of history.

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1358
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #601 on: October 03, 2016, 10:20:39 AM »
It really is laughable that people are voting for "who is worse" when one of the candidates is so obscenely more qualified than the other in every possible respect. People who think that there is a limit to how bad Trump can be have no appreciation of history.

Read fa's post regarding both candidates above.  I get why people are voting for (and against) Clinton.

cube.37

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 97
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #602 on: October 03, 2016, 10:46:30 AM »
In other words, Obama is the child of a US citizen, so it just does not matter even if he had been born in Kenya instead of Hawaii.

Well, technically this would depend on the country he was born in and whether he chose an American citizenship or not when was able and that countries dual citizenship laws.

You don't "choose" American citizenship.  I have 2 children born outside the US and both are US citizens.  if one parent is a US citizen, the child automatically is a US citizen unless they actively take steps to renounce it at 18.  You can fail to file for paperwork (SS card, birth certificate (consular certificate of birth for overseas), but even without filing for that paperwork, the child is still a US citizen.

Not actually true. The way I understand it, for a child born abroad to 2 US citizens to have US Citizenship, one of the parents must have had a residence in the US before the child's birth. If the child is born abroad to 1 US Citizen & 1 alien, then the US Citizen must have been physically present in the US for a period of five years, two after the age of fourteen.

I was born in Korea to an American father who lived in the US until he moved to Korea. I now live in the States so my children will have US Citizenship regardless of where they're born. However, had I never lived in the US and married another US citizen who was born, raised and lived in Korea her entire life, then my child would not be a US Citizen (unless born in the states).

Not relevant to the Obama discussion (I personally think the claim is retarded), but thought I'd let you know in case it might affect your children.

Also, might be different for military families.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal-considerations/us-citizenship-laws-policies/citizenship-child-born-abroad.html

ETA military bit.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2016, 10:50:49 AM by cube.37 »

Jeremy E.

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1946
  • Location: Lewiston, ID
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #603 on: October 03, 2016, 05:14:40 PM »
to be president, you don't merely need to be a US Citizen, you need to have either,
A. Be a natural born US citizen
B. Be a US Citizen when our country was formed.

Since we are not talking about people from the 1700's, we can go ahead and just say that from here on out, all presidents must be natural born US citizens

However, here is a cool podcast that talks about dual citizenship
http://www.madfientist.com/mike-and-lauren-interview/

redbirdfan

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 173
  • Location: Seattle
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #604 on: October 03, 2016, 06:57:45 PM »
Quote
A. Be a natural born US citizen

Most Constitutional scholars have defined this term to include children of US citizens born abroad as long as they were US citizens at the time of their birth (i.e. no naturalization was required for citizenship).  The issue came up regarding the eligibility of Ted Cruz to be president (born in Canada to a US citizen), https://www.rt.com/usa/338047-ted-cruz-eligible-citizenship-president/, the eligibility of John McCain to be president (born in Panama to parents who were US citizens), http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/john-mccains-presidential-eligibility/, and the eligibility of George Romney to be president (father of Mitt Romney, born in Mexico to US citizens).  George Romney ran for president in 1968.    http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2012/01/27/145987534/why-could-romneys-father-run-for-president-if-he-was-born-in-mexico


fa

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 233
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #605 on: October 03, 2016, 08:53:14 PM »
To be honest, I believe he is far more socially liberal than he leads on.

I have several friends who are otherwise sane and thoughtful progressive voters who are backing Trump for this very reason.  They argue that his positions in the 90s on things like abortion are more relevant than the things he says now, or the current policies on his website.

Really?  I don't actually know Hillary's views on social issues, but I am surprised some would think of Trump as more progressive socially than a female Democratic candidate.  At least that is how I read your post.  That is why some say this is an election between 2 New York Democrats, one declared and one undeclared.  And the plot thickens.

Jeremy E.

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1946
  • Location: Lewiston, ID
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #606 on: October 03, 2016, 10:38:41 PM »
To be honest, I believe he is far more socially liberal than he leads on.

I have several friends who are otherwise sane and thoughtful progressive voters who are backing Trump for this very reason.  They argue that his positions in the 90s on things like abortion are more relevant than the things he says now, or the current policies on his website.

Really?  I don't actually know Hillary's views on social issues, but I am surprised some would think of Trump as more progressive socially than a female Democratic candidate.  At least that is how I read your post.  That is why some say this is an election between 2 New York Democrats, one declared and one undeclared.  And the plot thickens.
Regardless of whether or not Trump is a Democrat or Republican, in my opinion he's an unethical selfish liar who is not fit to be president.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #607 on: October 04, 2016, 06:44:37 AM »
.
.
.

I have nothing to add to the discussion, but wanted to draw attention to the lovely musical nature of a debate between sol and fa.  Surely there's got to be a ray and mi somewhere on the forum who could join in . . .

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4929
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #608 on: October 04, 2016, 06:59:56 AM »
When Trump calls a former beauty queen fat, I go and look her up.  She is a normal looking woman to me. I think of other normal looking women in my life, my mom, sisters, and in-laws. I know the hurt that my mom has with trying to get back to the weight she was at 25 when she has a 55-year-old metabolism. I can only imagine how nasty Trump would be to the women in my life. These women deserve better than that.

How can a Trump supporter knowing how he would treat your mother/wife/daughter (calling her a fat pig) still vote for him?

Trump has said some amazingly stupid things (some of the things about this person were among them).  With regard to her weight, however, she was employed as Miss Universe and (I suspect) signed a contract to look a certain way.  If she failed to live up to those expectations, she hurts the brand.  I would tell my loved ones to avoid beauty contests if they have body image issues.

In addition, a) she has a serious credibility problem b) Hillary (married to Bill) is fairly rich as  champion of women's rights given the way Monica was destroyed after her dalliance with Bill.

Lastly, I think we deserve better than either of these 2.  We are arguing about which is worse.  I know almost no one voting FOR Trump, although they may be voting against Clinton.
An adult, who believes someone has broken a contract with them address the issue of a contract breech.  They do not sit there like a child insulting the other party.  The idea that because she may have breeched her contract, that he may act like a spoiled brat child who needs discipline is inane.

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #609 on: October 04, 2016, 08:34:20 AM »
To be honest, I believe he is far more socially liberal than he leads on.

I have several friends who are otherwise sane and thoughtful progressive voters who are backing Trump for this very reason.  They argue that his positions in the 90s on things like abortion are more relevant than the things he says now, or the current policies on his website.

Really?  I don't actually know Hillary's views on social issues, but I am surprised some would think of Trump as more progressive socially than a female Democratic candidate.  At least that is how I read your post.  That is why some say this is an election between 2 New York Democrats, one declared and one undeclared.  And the plot thickens.

Neither being a Democrat nor female necessarily implies being progressive (see "Blue Dog Democrats" and Margaret Thatcher as examples, respectively).

I agree that Trump is more liberal than Clinton (but that doesn't make him acceptable given his inability to control himself, let alone all the offensive shit he's said more recently). That's not a high bar, though.

Scandium

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2826
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #610 on: October 04, 2016, 10:46:38 AM »
to be president, you don't merely need to be a US Citizen, you need to have either,
A. Be a natural born US citizen

Does this exclude anyone born via caesarean section? As that is clearly not a "natural" birth. I'd like to see the hospital records for the birth of all candidates from now on!

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #611 on: October 04, 2016, 10:56:50 AM »
to be president, you don't merely need to be a US Citizen, you need to have either,
A. Be a natural born US citizen

Does this exclude anyone born via caesarean section? As that is clearly not a "natural" birth. I'd like to see the hospital records for the birth of all candidates from now on!

What about test tube babies?  Or IVF?

Why have the clause at all?  Shouldn't the people in a democracy be free to choose the best leader rather than artificially limited to the location on Earth that he/she slid out of his/her mom's vagina?

Scandium

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2826
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #612 on: October 04, 2016, 11:04:41 AM »
to be president, you don't merely need to be a US Citizen, you need to have either,
A. Be a natural born US citizen

Does this exclude anyone born via caesarean section? As that is clearly not a "natural" birth. I'd like to see the hospital records for the birth of all candidates from now on!

What about test tube babies?  Or IVF?

Why have the clause at all?  Shouldn't the people in a democracy be free to choose the best leader rather than artificially limited to the location on Earth that he/she slid out of his/her mom's vagina?

Well, vagina-based leader selection has a proud history. Not long ago most were chosen based simply on which vagina they came out of. So only being limited by the location of the vagina could be seen as progress..
« Last Edit: October 04, 2016, 02:55:10 PM by Scandium »

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1899
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #613 on: October 04, 2016, 01:17:00 PM »
The Prime Minister of Canada doesn't even have to be an elected member of parliament (we've had several prime ministers who were not elected at the time of their appointment), in fact they don't even have to be citizens of Canada... there really are no requirements at all, except that the Queen picks em :)

Northwestie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1224
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #614 on: October 04, 2016, 01:38:34 PM »
Interesting read from this Sunday's NYT Magazine on how Trump has caused a riff in the GOP.  Many folks not supporting him - including George Will who removed his affiliation with the party.  Others choking on voting for H. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/magazine/how-donald-trump-set-off-a-civil-war-within-the-right-wing-media.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fmagazine&action=click&contentCollection=magazine&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0


Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5278
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #615 on: October 05, 2016, 01:24:39 AM »
to be president, you don't merely need to be a US Citizen, you need to have either,
A. Be a natural born US citizen

Does this exclude anyone born via caesarean section? As that is clearly not a "natural" birth. I'd like to see the hospital records for the birth of all candidates from now on!

What about test tube babies?  Or IVF?

Why have the clause at all?  Shouldn't the people in a democracy be free to choose the best leader rather than artificially limited to the location on Earth that he/she slid out of his/her mom's vagina?

Well, vagina-based leader selection has a proud history. Not long ago most were chosen based simply on which vagina they came out of. So only being limited by the location of the vagina could be seen as progress..

As long as different laws apply to humans in different locations on the planet, it might seem logical to ensure the people making those laws have at least some understanding and stake in said laws.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #616 on: October 05, 2016, 05:56:59 AM »
to be president, you don't merely need to be a US Citizen, you need to have either,
A. Be a natural born US citizen

Does this exclude anyone born via caesarean section? As that is clearly not a "natural" birth. I'd like to see the hospital records for the birth of all candidates from now on!

What about test tube babies?  Or IVF?

Why have the clause at all?  Shouldn't the people in a democracy be free to choose the best leader rather than artificially limited to the location on Earth that he/she slid out of his/her mom's vagina?

Well, vagina-based leader selection has a proud history. Not long ago most were chosen based simply on which vagina they came out of. So only being limited by the location of the vagina could be seen as progress..

As long as different laws apply to humans in different locations on the planet, it might seem logical to ensure the people making those laws have at least some understanding and stake in said laws.

Agreed.  But that has nothing to do with where on the planet you were squeezed out of your mom's vagina.

Let's say you were born Vanatu, then at three years old your parents move to the US.  You grow up in the US, it's the only place you've ever known, you're very familiar with the laws.  What possible reason is there to prevent you from running for president?

nobodyspecial

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1464
  • Location: Land above the land of the free
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #617 on: October 05, 2016, 06:46:30 AM »
Let's say you were born Vanatu, then at three years old your parents move to the US.  You grow up in the US, it's the only place you've ever known, you're very familiar with the laws.  What possible reason is there to prevent you from running for president?
Presumably in revolutionary times it made sense to prevent a British puppet being placed on the Whitehouse throne.
But likes some other amendments it doesn't really make sense now and causes a bit of trouble.


hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1398
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
  • just want to see where this appears
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #618 on: October 05, 2016, 06:49:54 AM »
to be president, you don't merely need to be a US Citizen, you need to have either,
A. Be a natural born US citizen

Does this exclude anyone born via caesarean section? As that is clearly not a "natural" birth. I'd like to see the hospital records for the birth of all candidates from now on!

What about test tube babies?  Or IVF?

Why have the clause at all?  Shouldn't the people in a democracy be free to choose the best leader rather than artificially limited to the location on Earth that he/she slid out of his/her mom's vagina?

Well, vagina-based leader selection has a proud history. Not long ago most were chosen based simply on which vagina they came out of. So only being limited by the location of the vagina could be seen as progress..

As long as different laws apply to humans in different locations on the planet, it might seem logical to ensure the people making those laws have at least some understanding and stake in said laws.

Agreed.  But that has nothing to do with where on the planet you were squeezed out of your mom's vagina.

Let's say you were born Vanatu, then at three years old your parents move to the US.  You grow up in the US, it's the only place you've ever known, you're very familiar with the laws.  What possible reason is there to prevent you from running for president?
Are you running a shadow campaign for Arnold to be president?

It's just discriminatory, plain and simple. There are 300 million other people, most of which are eligible and we are talking about 1 job in the entire country that has an absolute ending date. So between the ages of 35 and 75 that one position will only get filled 10 times, thats it. Run for senator if it is that important to you. Could still be one of 100 of the most powerful people on earth.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #619 on: October 05, 2016, 06:54:37 AM »
to be president, you don't merely need to be a US Citizen, you need to have either,
A. Be a natural born US citizen

Does this exclude anyone born via caesarean section? As that is clearly not a "natural" birth. I'd like to see the hospital records for the birth of all candidates from now on!

What about test tube babies?  Or IVF?

Why have the clause at all?  Shouldn't the people in a democracy be free to choose the best leader rather than artificially limited to the location on Earth that he/she slid out of his/her mom's vagina?

Well, vagina-based leader selection has a proud history. Not long ago most were chosen based simply on which vagina they came out of. So only being limited by the location of the vagina could be seen as progress..

As long as different laws apply to humans in different locations on the planet, it might seem logical to ensure the people making those laws have at least some understanding and stake in said laws.

Agreed.  But that has nothing to do with where on the planet you were squeezed out of your mom's vagina.

Let's say you were born Vanatu, then at three years old your parents move to the US.  You grow up in the US, it's the only place you've ever known, you're very familiar with the laws.  What possible reason is there to prevent you from running for president?
Are you running a shadow campaign for Arnold to be president?

It's just discriminatory, plain and simple. There are 300 million other people, most of which are eligible and we are talking about 1 job in the entire country that has an absolute ending date. So between the ages of 35 and 75 that one position will only get filled 10 times, thats it. Run for senator if it is that important to you. Could still be one of 100 of the most powerful people on earth.

If you're planning on limiting the rights of someone, you should have a good reason to do so.  I just haven't heard a good reason for this particular restriction, so it seems wrong.

Scandium

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2826
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #620 on: October 05, 2016, 06:58:43 AM »
If you're planning on limiting the rights of someone, you should have a good reason to do so.  I just haven't heard a good reason for this particular restriction, so it seems wrong.

Hah! When did that ever stop anyone? "Because I feel like it", or "it's better for my tribe" is usually good enough reason for many.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 28444
  • Age: -997
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #621 on: October 05, 2016, 07:03:08 AM »
It's a hard line to try to ensure the loyalty is to your country first.

It's not a great one, but it's plausible, to me.
I am a former teacher who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, spent some time traveling the world full time and am now settled with three kids.
If you want to know more about me, this Business Insider profile tells the story pretty well.
I (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out the Now page to see what I'm up to currently.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #622 on: October 05, 2016, 07:22:48 AM »
It's a hard line to try to ensure the loyalty is to your country first.

It's not a great one, but it's plausible, to me.

You think Schwarzenegger(as an example that someone else threw out)'s  loyalty is to Austria rather than the US?

Pigeon

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1298
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #623 on: October 05, 2016, 07:30:33 AM »
It's in the Constitution, and I can understand why the writers might have thought it a good idea at the time.  Whether or not it is still a good idea, I seriously doubt that there will be sufficient public will to go through the political process of a successful amendment. 

There are plenty of naturalized citizens who might make better presidential candidates than ones we've had in recent history, but I don't see it happening.  So, I will have to continue to explain to my internationally adopted daughters why they cannot become President of the US.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 28444
  • Age: -997
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #624 on: October 05, 2016, 07:36:36 AM »
It's a hard line to try to ensure the loyalty is to your country first.

It's not a great one, but it's plausible, to me.

You think Schwarzenegger(as an example that someone else threw out)'s  loyalty is to Austria rather than the US?
No I don't.

But I also see value in life in drawing bright lines.

How do we judge when someone can be president?  Any citizen? Any person, if they can get enough votes?

Natural born citizen seems like a fine enough line to me.  I'm not opposed to it changing, either, but I don't have a problem with it.

I just don't see why Schwarzenegger has to be able to be president.
I am a former teacher who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, spent some time traveling the world full time and am now settled with three kids.
If you want to know more about me, this Business Insider profile tells the story pretty well.
I (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out the Now page to see what I'm up to currently.

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1398
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
  • just want to see where this appears
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #625 on: October 05, 2016, 08:22:09 AM »
It's a hard line to try to ensure the loyalty is to your country first.

It's not a great one, but it's plausible, to me.

You think Schwarzenegger(as an example that someone else threw out)'s  loyalty is to Austria rather than the US?
if I am someone does that mean I am somebody?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #626 on: October 05, 2016, 09:34:00 AM »
It's a hard line to try to ensure the loyalty is to your country first.

It's not a great one, but it's plausible, to me.

You think Schwarzenegger(as an example that someone else threw out)'s  loyalty is to Austria rather than the US?
if I am someone does that mean I am somebody?

Is the one word not completely interchangeable with the other?

Northwestie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1224
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #627 on: October 06, 2016, 02:28:38 PM »
A few more Republicans with a fully functional cortex have come out against Trump:

Thirty Republicans who served in Congress signed a letter saying they couldn’t vote for Trump in the general election.

“In nominating Donald Trump, the Republican Party has asked the people of the United States to entrust their future to a man who insults women, mocks the handicapped, urges that dissent be met with violence, seeks to impose religious tests for entry into the United States, and applies a de facto ethnicity test to judges,” the letter reads. “He offends our allies and praises dictators. His public statements are peppered with lies. He belittles our heroes and insults the parents of men who have died serving our country. Every day brings a fresh revelation that highlights the unacceptable danger in electing him to lead our nation.”

Among the letter’s signatories are former Reps. Bob Bauman (R-Md.), Steve Bartlett (R-Texas), Tom Coleman (R-Mo.), Bill Clinger (R-Pa.), Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.), Tom Petri (R-Wis.), Mickey Edwards (R-Okla.), Bob Inglis (R-S.C.), Vin Weber (R-Minn.), and Dick Zimmer (R-N.J.), and former Sen. Gordon Humphrey (R-N.H.).

idontknow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #628 on: October 06, 2016, 05:47:20 PM »
I have a potentially interesting perspective as I've never voted and was raised to be politically neutral (I know this isn't truly possible, but that was the goal). I also find politics to be entertaining and fascinating while also being disgusting.

That being said - my acquaintances that are voting Trump (read against Clinton) have some basic reasons. Near the top of the list is the ACA. Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive. Some also say that it only passed the Supreme Court because they ruled it a tax. But as I understand it, all taxes must originate in the congress. Some feel this requirement was not met. It does feel a bit like taxation without representation.

Let's also be honest, if the program benefits you - then you probably have some bias in favor of it. And no, I don't have a better solution to offer at this time.

One more piece of the frustration is that Dems want to portray themselves as being more willing to work with the other side and listen to the public, but IMO their agenda is sacred to them and above all common sense if the ends justify the means. Not a single Republican voted for ACA. Some will argue this makes them look like the bad guy, but passing laws that clearly don't represent half the population's wishes doesn't seem like the right thing to do.

I have a bunch more topics that I'll try to post each day for y'all to tear apart. I'm just trying to add some perspective on ISSUES (trying not to get into the personal attacks and stuff that doesn't impact our daily lives).

TLDR; many people are voting against Clinton due to strong dislike for the ACA and how it was passed.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2016, 05:50:02 PM by idontknow »

Scandium

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2826
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #629 on: October 06, 2016, 08:09:10 PM »
I have a potentially interesting perspective as I've never voted and was raised to be politically neutral (I know this isn't truly possible, but that was the goal). I also find politics to be entertaining and fascinating while also being disgusting.

That being said - my acquaintances that are voting Trump (read against Clinton) have some basic reasons. Near the top of the list is the ACA. Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive. Some also say that it only passed the Supreme Court because they ruled it a tax. But as I understand it, all taxes must originate in the congress. Some feel this requirement was not met. It does feel a bit like taxation without representation.

Let's also be honest, if the program benefits you - then you probably have some bias in favor of it. And no, I don't have a better solution to offer at this time.

One more piece of the frustration is that Dems want to portray themselves as being more willing to work with the other side and listen to the public, but IMO their agenda is sacred to them and above all common sense if the ends justify the means. Not a single Republican voted for ACA. Some will argue this makes them look like the bad guy, but passing laws that clearly don't represent half the population's wishes doesn't seem like the right thing to do.

I have a bunch more topics that I'll try to post each day for y'all to tear apart. I'm just trying to add some perspective on ISSUES (trying not to get into the personal attacks and stuff that doesn't impact our daily lives).

TLDR; many people are voting against Clinton due to strong dislike for the ACA and how it was passed.
What? I'm confused. How did ACA not originate in Congress? As far as I know it was up for debate in Congress, there was a vote and it became law. Was this not the case? What steps were "wrong" in these people's eyes?

Do they mean originate in the literal sense? That sounds like nonsense. Many laws are suggested by others then passed by Congress. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

And having an issue with a law passing that 49% of people don't like? Welcome to democracy.

Cathy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1044
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #630 on: October 06, 2016, 10:26:10 PM »
If you're planning on limiting the rights of someone, you should have a good reason to do so.  I just haven't heard a good reason for this particular restriction, so it seems wrong.

Americans at least have a significant say in choosing their head of state, even if the election is indirect and even if the list of candidates is somewhat limited by law.

By contrast, in Canada, the head of state is determined purely through lineage, without regard for merit, pursuant to the Act of Settlement, 1700, 12 & 13 Will 3, c 2, § 1, as amended, which is an Act of the legislature of a foreign country and can be changed by the UK Parliament at any time. See Motard v. Canada (Attorney General), 2016 QCCS 588 at ¶ 141 (noting that "because Canada is a constitutional monarchy, the King or Queen of the United Kingdom is the King or Queen of Canada").

In the United States, not all citizens can aspire to be head of state, but in Canada, no citizen at all can aspire to be head of state. The US scheme seems thoroughly egalitarian compared to the Canadian one.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2016, 12:15:05 AM by Cathy »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #631 on: October 07, 2016, 06:10:32 AM »
If you're planning on limiting the rights of someone, you should have a good reason to do so.  I just haven't heard a good reason for this particular restriction, so it seems wrong.

Americans at least have a significant say in choosing their head of state, even if the election is indirect and even if the list of candidates is somewhat limited by law.

By contrast, in Canada, the head of state is determined purely through lineage, without regard for merit, pursuant to the Act of Settlement, 1700, 12 & 13 Will 3, c 2, § 1, as amended, which is an Act of the legislature of a foreign country and can be changed by the UK Parliament at any time. See Motard v. Canada (Attorney General), 2016 QCCS 588 at ¶ 141 (noting that "because Canada is a constitutional monarchy, the King or Queen of the United Kingdom is the King or Queen of Canada").

In the United States, not all citizens can aspire to be head of state, but in Canada, no citizen at all can aspire to be head of state. The US scheme seems thoroughly egalitarian compared to the Canadian one.

As I'm sure you know, the queen of Canada today is effectively an ornamental role.  She doesn't act in any real way as the head of state, virtually all powers/decision making is delegated to elected officials . . . and she rarely even sets foot in the country.  By failing to acknowledge these facts, your post is quite misleading.

The 'head of state' is a vestigial appendage from British rule, and one that I (and a great many other Canadians) believe has outlived it's usefulness.  That said, the actual power in the country resides in the 'head of government' who is effectively appointed by the democratically elected ruling party, and is a position anyone can aspire to (Canadian or not).

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1541
  • Location: MA
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #632 on: October 07, 2016, 06:45:31 AM »
Quote
Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive.

First of all, no.  You are forced to pay for the ACA because you choose to be a citizen of this country, not just because you were born.  There are a lot of things we pay for by living in certain places that we don't explicitly agree to but are required if you want to live in a community.  Not everyone in the community agrees and they have the right to leave that community if it offends them that much.   

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #633 on: October 07, 2016, 06:48:45 AM »
Quote
Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive.

How do they feel about the many other things they are forced to pay for "simply for being born"?  (Like roads, police, the military, fire fighters, etc.)

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1398
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
  • just want to see where this appears
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #634 on: October 07, 2016, 08:30:40 AM »
Quote
Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive.

How do they feel about the many other things they are forced to pay for "simply for being born"?  (Like roads, police, the military, fire fighters, etc.)
You don't have to pay for any of those. you can sit on a couch or on a log in the woods and not have to pay those things.

the ACA however, yes just for being in existence and not paying for insurance you would be in violation of the law, a criminal, ie; the mandate.

jim555

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3235
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #635 on: October 07, 2016, 08:38:49 AM »
The ACA fines are not collectable as long as you never get a refund.  Seems easy to game.

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1358
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #636 on: October 07, 2016, 08:51:22 AM »
Quote
Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive.

How do they feel about the many other things they are forced to pay for "simply for being born"?  (Like roads, police, the military, fire fighters, etc.)
You don't have to pay for any of those. you can sit on a couch or on a log in the woods and not have to pay those things.

the ACA however, yes just for being in existence and not paying for insurance you would be in violation of the law, a criminal, ie; the mandate.

I don't believe violating the ACA is a criminal statute.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #637 on: October 07, 2016, 08:51:41 AM »
Quote
Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive.

How do they feel about the many other things they are forced to pay for "simply for being born"?  (Like roads, police, the military, fire fighters, etc.)
You don't have to pay for any of those. you can sit on a couch or on a log in the woods and not have to pay those things.

the ACA however, yes just for being in existence and not paying for insurance you would be in violation of the law, a criminal, ie; the mandate.

My understanding was that there's a minimum income threshold below which you don't have to pay a fine.  Is this not the case?

EDIT - Yep, it is.  https://www.irs.gov/affordable-care-act/individuals-and-families/aca-individual-shared-responsibility-provision-exemptions

So, you only pay the 'shared responsibility provision' if you're making a certain amount of money . . . just like all of the other things that you get taxed for making money on.  (Like roads, police, the military, fire fighters, etc.)  So my question still stands.  What's the difference between being taxed for one thing vs the other?
« Last Edit: October 07, 2016, 08:54:54 AM by GuitarStv »

idontknow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #638 on: October 07, 2016, 09:17:40 AM »
I have a potentially interesting perspective as I've never voted and was raised to be politically neutral (I know this isn't truly possible, but that was the goal). I also find politics to be entertaining and fascinating while also being disgusting.

That being said - my acquaintances that are voting Trump (read against Clinton) have some basic reasons. Near the top of the list is the ACA. Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive. Some also say that it only passed the Supreme Court because they ruled it a tax. But as I understand it, all taxes must originate in the congress. Some feel this requirement was not met. It does feel a bit like taxation without representation.

Let's also be honest, if the program benefits you - then you probably have some bias in favor of it. And no, I don't have a better solution to offer at this time.

One more piece of the frustration is that Dems want to portray themselves as being more willing to work with the other side and listen to the public, but IMO their agenda is sacred to them and above all common sense if the ends justify the means. Not a single Republican voted for ACA. Some will argue this makes them look like the bad guy, but passing laws that clearly don't represent half the population's wishes doesn't seem like the right thing to do.

I have a bunch more topics that I'll try to post each day for y'all to tear apart. I'm just trying to add some perspective on ISSUES (trying not to get into the personal attacks and stuff that doesn't impact our daily lives).

TLDR; many people are voting against Clinton due to strong dislike for the ACA and how it was passed.
What? I'm confused. How did ACA not originate in Congress? As far as I know it was up for debate in Congress, there was a vote and it became law. Was this not the case? What steps were "wrong" in these people's eyes?

Do they mean originate in the literal sense? That sounds like nonsense. Many laws are suggested by others then passed by Congress. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

And having an issue with a law passing that 49% of people don't like? Welcome to democracy.

So I had to look this up to see what it was all about, and it's interesting if you are into law and such. I just googled "did the ACA tax originate in Congress" and found an article on tenthamendmentcenter.com. I'm not sure on posting exact links to articles, but you can look it up.
It argues that the "penalty is void under a provision in the Constitution called the Origination Clause: Article I, Section 7, Clause 1.  It reads as follows:

“All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”

Summarizing briefly - the Supreme Court's only constitutional justification for the law was the revenue it would raise. That would mean it was a "bill for raising revenue" and must originate in the House of Reps.
The second half of this is harder to explain in one sentence, but basically the Senate did not propose an "amendment" on the bill, but rather completely gutted one bill and inserted the new bill. This basically means that a bill for raising revenue originated in the Senate - and not as required by the Constitution in the House.

I suspect that most will feel that this is a reach without considering the purpose of the Origination Clause. However, I have a feeling that if the shoe was on the other foot, this technicality would suffice as proof that the government did something shady.

This post really misses the whole point though, as many anti-Clinton voters are mad as heck about ACA. This is a reason for some of Trump's support that many have forgotten about. Many are convinced that politicians can pass anything they want through potentially shady means - no matter the strong opposition of a majority of the citizens.

Also, ACA has historically hovered around an approval rating of 40% (and never above 50%). Thanks for making me investigate this further.

nobodyspecial

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1464
  • Location: Land above the land of the free
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #639 on: October 07, 2016, 09:58:14 AM »
Not everyone in the community agrees and they have the right to leave that community if it offends them that much.   
Although ironically if you leave the US you still get to pay taxes for all the things you left because of.

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3493
  • Age: 94
  • Location: Upper left corner
  • FI(lean) working on the "RE"
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #640 on: October 07, 2016, 10:04:29 AM »
Does the anti-Clinton folks mad as heck about the ACA also include the group of people who want to keep the government out of their medicare?

And yes, the solution to the ACA, which is imperfect, is single payer health care. The US experiment has failed relative to the successes of pretty much every other modern economy.

Cathy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1044
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #641 on: October 07, 2016, 10:07:30 AM »
As I'm sure you know, the queen of Canada today is effectively an ornamental role.  She doesn't act in any real way as the head of state, virtually all powers/decision making is delegated to elected officials . . . and she rarely even sets foot in the country.  By failing to acknowledge these facts, your post is quite misleading.

The 'head of state' is a vestigial appendage from British rule, and one that I (and a great many other Canadians) believe has outlived it's usefulness.  That said, the actual power in the country resides in the 'head of government' who is effectively appointed by the democratically elected ruling party, and is a position anyone can aspire to (Canadian or not).

Despite her wide-ranging constitutional powers, the present-day Queen has little practical effect on the governance of Canada. Similarly, the natural born citizenship provisions of the US Constitution have little practical effect on the governance of the United States.

In both cases, we are dealing with provisions with little practical effect on the governance of the respective country. And in both cases, the main effect of the provisions is to send a symbolic message that certain people cannot ever hold the highest office in the land, based solely on facts about a person's birth. The difference is that in the case of Canada, the set of people who can never hold the highest office includes every single person who lives in Canada, whereas in the case of the United States, the set of people affected is proportionally much smaller.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2016, 10:11:29 AM by Cathy »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #642 on: October 07, 2016, 10:24:24 AM »
As I'm sure you know, the queen of Canada today is effectively an ornamental role.  She doesn't act in any real way as the head of state, virtually all powers/decision making is delegated to elected officials . . . and she rarely even sets foot in the country.  By failing to acknowledge these facts, your post is quite misleading.

The 'head of state' is a vestigial appendage from British rule, and one that I (and a great many other Canadians) believe has outlived it's usefulness.  That said, the actual power in the country resides in the 'head of government' who is effectively appointed by the democratically elected ruling party, and is a position anyone can aspire to (Canadian or not).

Despite her wide-ranging constitutional powers, the present-day Queen has little practical effect on the governance of Canada. Similarly, the natural born citizenship provisions of the US Constitution have little practical effect on the governance of the United States.

In both cases, we are dealing with provisions with little practical effect on the governance of the respective country. And in both cases, the main effect of the provisions is to send a symbolic message that certain people cannot ever hold the highest office in the land, based solely on facts about a person's birth. The difference is that in the case of Canada, the set of people who can never hold the highest office includes every single person who lives in Canada, whereas in the case of the United States, the set of people affected is proportionally much smaller.

As you mentioned, the role of the queen is that of a figurehead.  It's not really the highest office in the country.  That position is held by the Prime Minister.

The role of the president isn't symbolic.  Preventing people from being president has significant practical effect on the governance of the country.  There are people who were not born in the US who are charismatic and involved in politics, and would have a shot at running for president were it not for this rule.

I think you're stretching in your attempts to equate an ornamental role with one of power.

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1398
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
  • just want to see where this appears
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #643 on: October 07, 2016, 10:30:17 AM »
I have a potentially interesting perspective as I've never voted and was raised to be politically neutral (I know this isn't truly possible, but that was the goal). I also find politics to be entertaining and fascinating while also being disgusting.

That being said - my acquaintances that are voting Trump (read against Clinton) have some basic reasons. Near the top of the list is the ACA. Many believe that it is flat out unconstitutional to require a person to be forced to pay for something simply for being born - unlike car insurance which is only required if you choose to drive. Some also say that it only passed the Supreme Court because they ruled it a tax. But as I understand it, all taxes must originate in the congress. Some feel this requirement was not met. It does feel a bit like taxation without representation.

Let's also be honest, if the program benefits you - then you probably have some bias in favor of it. And no, I don't have a better solution to offer at this time.

One more piece of the frustration is that Dems want to portray themselves as being more willing to work with the other side and listen to the public, but IMO their agenda is sacred to them and above all common sense if the ends justify the means. Not a single Republican voted for ACA. Some will argue this makes them look like the bad guy, but passing laws that clearly don't represent half the population's wishes doesn't seem like the right thing to do.

I have a bunch more topics that I'll try to post each day for y'all to tear apart. I'm just trying to add some perspective on ISSUES (trying not to get into the personal attacks and stuff that doesn't impact our daily lives).

TLDR; many people are voting against Clinton due to strong dislike for the ACA and how it was passed.
What? I'm confused. How did ACA not originate in Congress? As far as I know it was up for debate in Congress, there was a vote and it became law. Was this not the case? What steps were "wrong" in these people's eyes?

Do they mean originate in the literal sense? That sounds like nonsense. Many laws are suggested by others then passed by Congress. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

And having an issue with a law passing that 49% of people don't like? Welcome to democracy.

So I had to look this up to see what it was all about, and it's interesting if you are into law and such. I just googled "did the ACA tax originate in Congress" and found an article on tenthamendmentcenter.com. I'm not sure on posting exact links to articles, but you can look it up.
It argues that the "penalty is void under a provision in the Constitution called the Origination Clause: Article I, Section 7, Clause 1.  It reads as follows:

“All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”

Summarizing briefly - the Supreme Court's only constitutional justification for the law was the revenue it would raise. That would mean it was a "bill for raising revenue" and must originate in the House of Reps.
The second half of this is harder to explain in one sentence, but basically the Senate did not propose an "amendment" on the bill, but rather completely gutted one bill and inserted the new bill. This basically means that a bill for raising revenue originated in the Senate - and not as required by the Constitution in the House.

I suspect that most will feel that this is a reach without considering the purpose of the Origination Clause. However, I have a feeling that if the shoe was on the other foot, this technicality would suffice as proof that the government did something shady.

This post really misses the whole point though, as many anti-Clinton voters are mad as heck about ACA. This is a reason for some of Trump's support that many have forgotten about. Many are convinced that politicians can pass anything they want through potentially shady means - no matter the strong opposition of a majority of the citizens.

Also, ACA has historically hovered around an approval rating of 40% (and never above 50%). Thanks for making me investigate this further.

Perhaps a larger point could be made simply that many states as a whole, nor any republicans wanted the ACA. Basically the dem congress passed something as monumental as the ACA without broader support. Anyone who gets mad that republicans are obstructing government really shouldn't for this reason; they are just doing in reverse what the Dems did. Now, if an individual is angry because they like the ACA and republicans are trying to get rid of it, well yes then that is logical and makes sense.

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1398
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
  • just want to see where this appears
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #644 on: October 07, 2016, 10:34:31 AM »
As I'm sure you know, the queen of Canada today is effectively an ornamental role.  She doesn't act in any real way as the head of state, virtually all powers/decision making is delegated to elected officials . . . and she rarely even sets foot in the country.  By failing to acknowledge these facts, your post is quite misleading.

The 'head of state' is a vestigial appendage from British rule, and one that I (and a great many other Canadians) believe has outlived it's usefulness.  That said, the actual power in the country resides in the 'head of government' who is effectively appointed by the democratically elected ruling party, and is a position anyone can aspire to (Canadian or not).

Despite her wide-ranging constitutional powers, the present-day Queen has little practical effect on the governance of Canada. Similarly, the natural born citizenship provisions of the US Constitution have little practical effect on the governance of the United States.

In both cases, we are dealing with provisions with little practical effect on the governance of the respective country. And in both cases, the main effect of the provisions is to send a symbolic message that certain people cannot ever hold the highest office in the land, based solely on facts about a person's birth. The difference is that in the case of Canada, the set of people who can never hold the highest office includes every single person who lives in Canada, whereas in the case of the United States, the set of people affected is proportionally much smaller.

As you mentioned, the role of the queen is that of a figurehead.  It's not really the highest office in the country.  That position is held by the Prime Minister.

The role of the president isn't symbolic.  Preventing people from being president has significant practical effect on the governance of the country.  There are people who were not born in the US who are charismatic and involved in politics, and would have a shot at running for president were it not for this rule.

I think you're stretching in your attempts to equate an ornamental role with one of power.

I just don't get your point. People 200 years ago, and some of us now, believe the highest executive in the land needs to have loyalty to his country without reservation above all else. Natural born citizen seems like the best universal way to ensure that.

Scandium

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2826
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #645 on: October 07, 2016, 10:47:17 AM »
I just don't get your point. People 200 years ago, and some of us now, believe the highest executive in the land needs to have loyalty to his country without reservation above all else. Natural born citizen seems like the best universal way to ensure that.

How does the location of your birth ensure loyalty? Is there a logical reason to be loyal to a specific area just because your mom was there at the moment of your birth? If anything the person who uprooted their life and move to America has shown more drive to want to live there. As opposed to someone who just happened to be born there and said "fine, guess I'll live here". I don't see how you can judge one as more loyal just based on their birthplace.

And is lack of loyalty really and issue in presidents? Or something we should fear? They get vetted pretty hard during the campaign, and if they do something illegal they get impeached. Are we really worried some Manchurian candidate will sell Texas to Russia behind our backs or something? What exactly is the problem?
« Last Edit: October 07, 2016, 11:50:44 AM by Scandium »

TexasRunner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 926
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Somewhere in Tejas
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #646 on: October 07, 2016, 10:55:32 AM »
.... Are we really worried some Manchurian candidate will sell Texas to Russian behind our backs or something? What exactly is the problem?

LOL!  Bring It!  Putin will love us!

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1899
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #647 on: October 07, 2016, 11:48:24 AM »
I just don't get your point. People 200 years ago, and some of us now, believe the highest executive in the land needs to have loyalty to his country without reservation above all else. Natural born citizen seems like the best universal way to ensure that.

How does the location of your birth ensure loyalty? Is there a logical reason to be loyal to a specific area just because your mom was there at the moment of your birth? If anything the person who uprooted their life and move to America has shown more drive to want to live there. As opposed to someone who just happened to be born there and said "fine, guess I'll live here". I don't see how you can judge one as more loyal just based on their birthplace.

And is lack of loyalty really and issue in presidents? Or something we should fear? They get vetted pretty hard during the campaign, and if they do something illegal they get impeached. Are we really worried some Manchurian candidate will sell Texas to Russian behind our backs or something? What exactly is the problem?

It doesn't ensure loyalty. Note that there have been more American deaths caused by Americans (born in the US) than any foreign power or people has inflicted. Most of this is due to the Civil War. Note that Jefferson Davis was born in Kentucky but that didn't stop him from splitting the country in two.

Timothy McVeigh also comes to mind. There are also plenty of "home grown" ISIS folks in the US.

The original intention, that some British or other royalty doesn't come into power from abroad, was a real concern in 1776. It doesn't apply now.

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1899
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #648 on: October 07, 2016, 11:49:49 AM »
Back to the thread... can a Trump supporter please let me know when America was "great" and why we want to return to that time? Please provide a specific year or decade you would like to be in rather than the present.

Thanks!

Jeremy E.

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1946
  • Location: Lewiston, ID
Re: Trump Voters.... why?
« Reply #649 on: October 07, 2016, 12:18:37 PM »
I just don't get your point. People 200 years ago, and some of us now, believe the highest executive in the land needs to have loyalty to his country without reservation above all else. Natural born citizen seems like the best universal way to ensure that.

How does the location of your birth ensure loyalty? Is there a logical reason to be loyal to a specific area just because your mom was there at the moment of your birth? If anything the person who uprooted their life and move to America has shown more drive to want to live there. As opposed to someone who just happened to be born there and said "fine, guess I'll live here". I don't see how you can judge one as more loyal just based on their birthplace.

And is lack of loyalty really and issue in presidents? Or something we should fear? They get vetted pretty hard during the campaign, and if they do something illegal they get impeached. Are we really worried some Manchurian candidate will sell Texas to Russian behind our backs or something? What exactly is the problem?

It doesn't ensure loyalty. Note that there have been more American deaths caused by Americans (born in the US) than any foreign power or people has inflicted. Most of this is due to the Civil War. Note that Jefferson Davis was born in Kentucky but that didn't stop him from splitting the country in two.

Timothy McVeigh also comes to mind. There are also plenty of "home grown" ISIS folks in the US.

The original intention, that some British or other royalty doesn't come into power from abroad, was a real concern in 1776. It doesn't apply now.
From like 1950-1990 I'm sure it was a real concern about russian spies, I'm sure some people are now worried about Muslim spies (especially Trump and his supporters). Myself, I think that you shouldn't have to be a natural born citizen, but you should have to be a U.S. citizen, and to have served the U.S. in some major way for 8 years, whether that is by being in congress, a governor, the military, etc.