Wile E. Coyote reveals his next big idea to stop Roadrunner Trump

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

RDANGELO (1,623 posts)

A law that is definitely needed .

Major candidates for president need to be evaluated for medical health and national security risks. Any sitting US senator or representative who has declared , or a candidate who has won a primary should be evaluated. A board of doctors should be assembled to evaluate the candidates for physical as well as mental wellness issues. Homeland Security would commission an investigation on the candidates to insure that their ascension to the presidency would not be a threat to national security. The public reports would be issued before the national conventions.

That pretty much would have nuked Hillary's candidacy.

But don't take my word for it, here's a transgendered youtube commenter with all the details...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7801CCLgvIw

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210000486

[SVPete]

Were a mental heath check a prerequisite for being able to post on DU its forums would be empty.

[67 Rover]

RDANGELO (1,623 posts)

A law that is definitely needed .

Major candidates for president need to be evaluated for medical health and national security risks. Any sitting US senator or representative who has declared , or a candidate who has won a primary should be evaluated. A board of doctors should be assembled to evaluate the candidates for physical as well as mental wellness issues. Homeland Security would commission an investigation on the candidates to insure that their ascension to the presidency would not be a threat to national security. The public reports would be issued before the national conventions.

Does this include the pickle jar test and the candidate dead weight toss test?

[VelvetElvis]

Does this include the pickle jar test and the candidate dead weight toss test?

It's far simpler than that.

"D" = OK, even if the candidate is actually decomposing.
"R" = Fail!!!!, even if the candidate has descended from heaven with a choir of angels.

[BadCat]

Ok, Obammy's admitted cocaine use disqualifies him for a security clearance.  He'd have never soiled the Oval Office.

[SVPete]

Does this include the pickle jar test and the candidate dead weight toss test?

Don't forget the venerable Cinder Block & Chicken Wire Test.

[FlaGator]

Were a mental heath check a prerequisite for being able to post on DU its forums would be empty.

Except for the mental health forum.

[Carl]

It would be nice if they ever could understand basic civics.

A likely one and done poster chimes in.

Response to RDANGELO (Original post)

Tue Dec 19, 2017, 05:59 AM

st17011864200072405 (1 post)
3. Hmmm.....

You do know that by adding to the qualifications for the presidency, that your idea will require an amendment to the Constitution, right? And as stated in the op, it doesn't seem very well fleshed out.

About the first proposal,

1. Who will choose the board of doctors?

2. What happens if a candidate claims that the board is biased against them?

3. What if you feel that the board has been packed with incompetent nutcases and deems a candidate fit for office?

And the second,

4. What if homeland security deems a candidate a threat and they are nominated, or if not nominated by a major party, they run as an independent?

5. What if a candidate deemed as a threat is elected?

6. Do you think that homeland security should be able to nullify an election?

One of the consequences of living in the US is that there are times when we think that the president is detrimental to our norms and institutions and a threat to the rule of law and the Constitution. What should prevent that threat from materializing in this country are the checks and balances of the Constitution given to the other branches of government. If those tools are not being used to prevent a crisis, it is up to we the people to choose those that will check and unruly executive.

This proposal is problematic because there are no objective definitions of either assessment upon which you seek to base a judgment of a presidential candidate.

[SVPete]

It would be nice if they ever could understand basic civics.

A likely one and done poster chimes in.

st17011864200072405 (1 post)
3. Hmmm.....

You do know that by adding to the qualifications for the presidency, that your idea will require an amendment to the Constitution, right? And as stated in the op, it doesn't seem very well fleshed out.

About the first proposal,

1. Who will choose the board of doctors?

2. What happens if a candidate claims that the board is biased against them?

3. What if you feel that the board has been packed with incompetent nutcases and deems a candidate fit for office?

And the second,

4. What if homeland security deems a candidate a threat and they are nominated, or if not nominated by a major party, they run as an independent?

5. What if a candidate deemed as a threat is elected?

6. Do you think that homeland security should be able to nullify an election?

One of the consequences of living in the US is that there are times when we think that the president is detrimental to our norms and institutions and a threat to the rule of law and the Constitution. What should prevent that threat from materializing in this country are the checks and balances of the Constitution given to the other branches of government. If those tools are not being used to prevent a crisis, it is up to we the people to choose those that will check and unruly executive.

This proposal is problematic because there are no objective definitions of either assessment upon which you seek to base a judgment of a presidential candidate.

MIRT Alert! MIRT Alert!!!

[Old n Grumpy]

I think the only thing that would satisfy those ass holes is if the selection process and vote was limited to du members.

Even then there would probably still be discontent. they can never be happy or satisfied.