|
08-03-2007, 02:43 PM | #1 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Perhaps the average citizen is too naive
but what makes the average voter want to entrust the toughest political job to somebody who has never accomplished anything?
If Hillary or Obama are serious candidates, they've never accomplished anything. If you were interviewing for President you would find them unqualified. Think about it, if you were the IBM board, and looked for somebody to guide your company neither Hillary nor Obama would ever be seriously considered. Neither has ever managed or accomplished anything, and voters are willing to entrust the most dangerous and difficult job to unqualified bozos? Even Romney or Giuliani are light in experience but they're loads more qualified and successful than either Democratic front runner. Name one situation where either has managed a situation where somebody other than their own personal selves have benefitted. You cannot. It's crazy to risk on the job training.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα Last edited by Archaea; 08-03-2007 at 02:54 PM. |
08-03-2007, 02:59 PM | #2 |
AKA SeattleNewt
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,055
|
This depends on what you consider accomplishments. They have both great academic accomplishments, have been elected by an entire state, and motivated people to contribute millions of dollars to their presidential campaign.
On the other hand, It's been decades since Hillary Clinton has billed an hour as an attorney. Barack Obama's work experience is as a community organizer, university lecturer, and civil rights lawyer. What the hell is a "community organizer?" Civil rights lawyer? Admirable, but it says nothing to his competence in managing the federal bureacracy. I think what you're getting at is that you don't like career politicians. I'm with you on that. On a sidenote, one of the reasons I like Romney is that he is clearly the most accomplished in his non-governmental endeavors. He's not a good politician and for that I like him. He says strange things, has no foreign policy experience, and is opportunistic. But that's how businessmen work. They see opportunity and they get it. I think he'll be the most competent manager the nation needs to reign in federal spending, attempt to streamline the federal bureacracy, and run a scandal free administration. After 16 years of the opposite, it would be a nice change. |
08-03-2007, 03:07 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
|
The press can be so frustrating. I hear many times how strong the democratic field is. They may be strong on personality and star power, but what else. Obama give nice upbeat speaches. He sticks his foot in his mouth, but the press likes him and basically gives him a pass. Hillary, well everyone knows what Hillary is like. I just can't see her running the Country. Not because she is a woman. I could see Condie Rice running the Country easily. Edwards, what a dick and that is all I have to say about him.
The press then says the Repub. field is weak because undecided is the candidate with the highest percentage. Really, because you are undecided between two choices that means both choices are weak. I would love to be able to sit there and comment after each of these press guys make a comment. My line would always be, really, you think the American people are that stupid to buy what you just said. |
08-03-2007, 07:19 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,964
|
Ronald Reagan was an actor and he turned out to be one of the best presidents of the last 50 years. The president is not a CEO. His basic qualifications are to have vision and to be a strong leader. The CEO of IBM is a fantastic business man, but I would never want him to be President of the United States.
__________________
...You've been under attack for days, there's a soldier down, he's wounded, gangrene's setting in, 'Who's used all the penicillin?' 'Oh, Mark Paxson sir, he's got knob rot off of some tart.'" - Gareth Keenan Last edited by non sequitur; 08-03-2007 at 07:35 PM. |
08-03-2007, 07:26 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 860
|
Quote:
|
|
08-03-2007, 08:44 PM | #6 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
08-03-2007, 08:48 PM | #7 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
|
The person most prepared to be president is John McCain hands down.
But no one wants him. |
08-03-2007, 08:59 PM | #8 | |
AKA SeattleNewt
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,055
|
Quote:
His ability to run his presidential campaign is not a good indicator of his executive ability. His upper-level campaign staff was in shambles and he let it happen. He can't raise money and doesn't have a coherent campaign plan. He has thumbed his nose at the base of the party for too long and it's come to bite him in the ass. Many people were able to accept him despite McCain-Feingold and the Gang of 14, but his recent actions on the immigration bill put him quite a bit behind. I still think he'd be a great nominee and ultimately a fine president. I just don't know if he can pull out of his tailspin. |
|
08-03-2007, 09:03 PM | #9 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
What executive or managerial experience does McCain have? I'm asking because I thought he's merely served as a Senator.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
08-03-2007, 09:20 PM | #10 | |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
|
Quote:
He helped run a Annheiser-Busch distributor. He also told this joke at a fundraiser: "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno." |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|