Hey, there! Log in / Register
Some Bostonians will be voting in a different presidential election this year
By adamg on Fri, 02/26/2016 - 11:25am
Supporters of Danilo Medina, incumbent president of the Dominican Republic, have set up a campaign office in a former travel agency on Washington Street in Roslindale. The election is May 15.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
That noise you hear is
Trump voters heads exploding.
No its not!
Im not voting socialist this upcoming election, and this doesn't bother me the slightest. People with dull citizenship voting for their countries president.
If anything it should make the bed wetting liberal cry bloody murder. DR is kicking out all of the Haitians illegally in the country. You know like what most major sovereign territories do.
This guy is the Trump of DR, and will probably win re-election in a landslide.
I think I'll stay here for awhile
We no longer practice ethnic cleansing, for one thing, despite what spittle-spewing chaw-chewing ammosexuals like the Bundys want.
WHAT?????????
Ethnic cleansing?
Here's a link to a map of the world.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF...
Why do you think the majority of people in this country illegally are from Mexico, maybe it because we boarder Mexico. The same could be said about Haiti/DR.
Also who said anything about murdering people? Nice knee jerking bro!
Nothing says
Nothing says "my views on national sovereignty and immigration should be taken seriously" like misspelling the word "border".
You are focusing on typos
You are focusing on typos rather than arguments.
Hate to break it to you but
Hate to break it to you but they are not typos. They are errors in the English language (a dying language). The incorrect use of "maybe it cause" and "boarder" (refers to a human, and not a boundary line). I'm depressed now.
If it helps
The argument didn't have a lot going for it either
Thing is...
It may be an ad hominem attack, but it also illustrates someone who appears less educated, and therefore may not be worth arguing with in the first place.
By continuing the debate, you're letting that person both set the rules for the debate and determine which ones are one-sided, which is a poor position. It's generally also indicative that this person won't ever change his/her opinion even if you smash their arguments to little bits. So, once again, not worth the time.
What's the cancer killing America?
The belief by the uneducated that they are somehow "empowered" by their lack of critical thinking skills.
You do know
Not all Dominicans are of Hispanic heritage, a large portion of DRs population has African heritage. Palm meet face, get out more!
Do you know how to use Google?
Skin color has nothing to do with it. It's all about ethnicity - people of Haitian descent that the government wants to dump over the border.
Why are you slapping yourself in the face, anyway?
Congratulations Adam
You just out crazied the Boston NAACP with that comment.
Why thank you, kind sir
I am to please my rabid fans.
Ethnic cleaning?
Since when did "illegal immigrant" become ethnicity?
Dull citizenship?
Leave Canada out of this, man
"Like what most major
"Like what most major sovereign territories do." Sad to say that a lot of sovereign territories do aspire to Trujillo's campaign of ethnic cleansing. So yes, the bleeding heart liberal in me is upset about the DR's rescinding of citizenship of thousands of people going back to 1929.
Please wipe the foam from the corners
of your mouth. Thank you.
I'm positive
that none of his supporters voting for him by absentee ballots will be voting in our upcoming election. That is a myth perpetrated by knuckle dragging neanderthal xenophobes.
Dual citizenship is a thing
Just ask all those Irish like myself.
A lot of people do not think
A lot of people do not think it is a good thing. It's definitely not officially condoned.
Unfortunately, being born in
Unfortunately, being born in the USA of parents also born here I don't have a backup country to move to if things get bad here.
There's always Cape Breton Island
Cape Breton Island If Trump Wins:
Some countries
Will grant you citizenship if you grandparent were born there!
As does a few of my family
As does a few of my family members, but I do believe that at minimum your grandparents had to be Irish born.
A lot of people do not think
A lot of people do not think it's a good thing and it's not officially condoned.
The US does is not officially
The US does is not officially condoned having that, it's certainly not something advocated, and a lot of people believe you should choose one.
When the US condemns it
and it is law you can have an argument about it.
Not condoning something is not a legal position! It is not a position you can take to a court of law.
A US senator had dual citizenship with Canada until it became an inconvenient truth last year (Ted Cruz).
It's a fact of life, and you disliking it is irrelevant.
The argument stands and you
The argument stands and you don't need a decree to debate something. You don't decide that.
There are a lot of things that while technically allowed are not mature, reasonable, sensible, moral, or good citizenship.
"He did it why can't I" is not how rational people govern or form policy.
The fact that you don't like people debating a practice that some decide to take advantage of is irrelevant.
The bottom line is that it is not condoned and that some decide to take advantage is not justification in and of itself.
We are a nation of laws
This is not a "loop hole".
There is no law that says you cannot have dual citizenship. Period.
A lot of people disagree with
A lot of people disagree with you and the oath very clearly states you are only supposed to have allegiance to one place.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-dual-citizenship-2014122...
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/05/14/can-dual-citizens-be-goo...
At the end if the day you are still reaching for justification for something that the government does not condone and goes against the oath people take.
Still more weak justification
Still more weak justification for taking advantage of a practice that is not encouraged and poses great debates.
Ultimately, some people treat the opportunity of becoming a member of this place not as a mere convenience but as something greater.
The official website states
The official website states that it "does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause."
That prefer to treat it as more little than a matter convenience does not mean there is no debate about it.
Yet still not a law
So debate it all you want with yourself.
It means nothing in a court of law.
It means a lot about the
It means a lot about the importance of being a good resident and treating citizenship as more than a convenience.
Basically you are saying "don
Basically you are saying "don't critize me for taking advantage of a loophole" that is not officially endorsed.
You don't understand the meaning of loophole
There is no ambiguity in the law.
There simply is no law.
Wrong. The lack of
Wrong. The lack of regulation can be a loophole, not simply ambiguous regulation.
Its still legal
And that's all that matters.
No, it's not all that matters
No, it's not all that matters to a lot of people, but perhaps it is to people who don't much care about it beyond the matter of convenience.
Blah blah blah.
Laws matter.
You don't!
It's.not officially condoned
It's.not officially condoned and there is no law that specifically allows it the way you are writing about.
The fact you started your argument that way shows how little substance you are arguing with. It seems like you just don't like people suggesting that even officials don't think it's a good idea and apparently a lot of people only care about it for convenience.
It's something that many people have issues with and official policy is not to advocate it.
Question for Anon
You made an unsubstantiated claim that many here know to be wrong.
Why don't you substantiate it by citing an actual LAW before asking for others to "disprove" it? How about an actual legal precedent?
The simple fact is that your citizenship status and eligibility to vote in other countries is not controlled by the United States if you are a dual citizen. Period. The US has no way to control your citizenship status in other countries because ... THEY ARE OTHER COUNTRIES! The US does NOT determine the eligibility of voters IN OTHER COUNTRIES.
Please cite any constitutional provisions that prohibit voting in elections outside of the US or any laws or legal precedents where a US citizen has been sanctioned for doing so, or drop it.
Your tenacious grip on your fantasy is rather tedious at this point.
"unsubstantiated claim that
"unsubstantiated claim that many here know to be wrong."
No. It's official policy not to endorse it. That is the claim and it's true. If you wish to claim that's not true you would have. To
"rather tedious at this point."
This is your first post in the entire discussion. You don't come in at the last post and state that with any meaning.
It is official policy not to endorse or advcate it, and many people think it's not a good idea. That has been the claim. Some people don't want to be judged for treating this as a mere matter of convenience. You can go to the actual website and read this for yourself.
If you want to claim that what is posted the official website is wrong, that's for you to do.
Official policy?
PROVE IT.
Links to a couple of opinion pieces that happen to agree with you ARE NOT PROOF.
Actual citations of laws and legal precedents wrt dual citizens voting abroad are necessary.
Go to the official website
Go to the official website that governs these matters and search, "exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause." It's posted there right now.
No link
Seriously. What is wrong with you?
You need to provide the proof.
I'm declaring this subthread done
There's nothing more to be said.
Thanks.
Link.
Link.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-dual-citizenship-2014122...
You can follow the quotes in that article to the same information and quotes on the official state dpt website. Sorry Adam, done now.
Also, no. Legal precedent
Also, no. Legal precedent isn't necessary because I'm talking about what is "condoned" and "advocated", and it's very clearly not.
I am a dual citizen....
....and I like Voting in Canada because we are not inundated by uneducated wiseacres...and we don't get voter burnout like some Americans do.
Thanks, sis!
You should not do that where
You should not do that where you don't have full time residency. That not good or moral behavior at all.
You know what?
You should just go mind your own citizenship, purity of essence, business, etc.
Also, learn to provide links. "But its on some government website officially somewhere maybe" isn't a demonstration of anything.
Preston Manning
If you were from Quebec, I'd search out that quote from the BQ leader after thev1990s succession vote, but I believe you are from Reform country.
It is unambiguously not
It is unambiguously not advocated by officials and is contrary to the process in the first lace.
That there is no law opposing does not make it moral, mature, or good citizenship.
Its kinda like gay marriage
Nobody gives a flying F what you think. The only thing that matters is the law.
Don't like dual citizenship? Don't get one.
But the millions of people with dual citizenship have a right to have it. So keep up-voting yourself. It means nothing. Dual citizenship is still legal in every sense of the word.
Even the this pol on real
Even the this pol on real time with bill maher sees problems with it, timestamp 5m30s.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PWHJbAcMa0Y
There are real concerns about it. It's simply not regulated and certainly not condoned. Yourcomment about up voting is hilarious and your profanity is not helpful to your argument.
Everything from national newspapers to millions of people are debating it.
It's still the law of the land.
And you are not.
So post all the web links you want. I'm not your husband. Repeating the same crap over and over again doesn't work on me. I could care less what you think. All I care about is what the law says.
Actually it's not, and they
Actually it's not, and they discourage it, they just don't bother to do much about it.
Non citizens are the ones i'm worried about voting
" I Renounce and abjure absolutely and entirely all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which the applicant was before a subject or citizen"
When did you take that oath?
Many dual citizens are citizens of the US at birth.
Holy Tostones Batman
all of a sudden the DR is somehow not practicing ethnic cleansing (it is) and dual citizenship is an amoral tool of the devil (it isn't).
one campaign sign sure makes things escalate quickly.
Dramatic
Why make a big deal about something so small. They have been doing this for years already.
Simply because there are so many Dominicans in the surrounded areas that can simply make a vote if they are not in the Dominican Republic at the time of the elections etc. People need to stop being drama queens!