If I could Choose The President

1. 85

   Sharlee01posted 12 months ago

   
   
   
   If you had the opportunity to select a new president in 2024, would you have a 'presidential preference' or a vision of the ideal person for the presidency? Remember, your choice can encompass anyone, regardless of whether they are among the anticipated candidates or even a politician.
   
   Would you like to share your pick for this role?
   
   For me, I would choose Condoleezza Rice.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

      No, Sharlee, Condolezza Rice is far too moderate for a MAGA team member like yourself. The party has moved in a rightward direction far beyond where she is politically. I would support a Dr. Rice before any of the current Republican contenders. And if we can agree on a potential candidate, something is wrong....

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

         I have such great respect for Condoleezza Rice, her character, her experiences, and her very demeanor. Plus Rice is an expert in Global Business and the Economy. In my mind, she has it all and would make a great president.
         
         I feel she is right down the middle, and right down the middle is where I think we need to be right now to bring back some stability, and perhaps heal the great divide. She would be the perfect president at this given time.

         replyreport
         1. 86

            tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Agreed, emphatically!! As an aside how much do you think she is influencing our future leaders at Stanford?

            replyreport
      2. 70

         Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

         You put people in the Trump column because they don't agree that Biden is better than Trump, that is not to say that they want Trump, just that they recognize he wasn't as bad for the world as this sorry bunch in control now is.
         
         There is a huge difference between being all in on Trump, and recognizing the truth that just about any option is better than the current Administration.
         
         My article: Why-America-needs-Condoleezza-Rice
         From way back in 2012.
         We don't get the leaders we really need.  Certainly not right now.
         Surprised that article survived my many purges, I have cleaned out a bunch.  No use leaving ones that predicted what was to come, once it came to pass.  Used to have one predicting our war against Russia and went into great detail as to why we would pursue it.  Those are the types that get attention drawn to you when they are proven spot on, that I don't want.
         
         EDIT - Damn if it isn't depressing reading my own articles....
         The country, the world, might be in such a vastly better place if it had been Rice as President from 2016 to today.  Vastly better place, by an almost unimaginable difference.

         replyreport
         1. 86

            tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Article after article shares that people, today, vote against someone/something. Not for someone/something. That is built into the political machinery today especially seen with throwing mud at someone rather than professing reasons to vote for themself as the best choice.

            replyreport
            1. 70

               Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

               IF ONLY:
               
               "After all, when the world looks to America, they look to us because we are the most successful political and economic experiment in human history. That is the true basis of “American Exceptionalism.” The essence of America – that which really unites us — is not ethnicity, or nationality or religion – it is an idea — and what an idea it is: That you can come from humble circumstances and do great things. That it doesn’t matter where you came from but where you are going.
               
               Ours has never been a narrative of grievance and entitlement. We have not believed that I am doing poorly because you are doing well. We have not been envious of one another and jealous of each other’s success. Ours has been a belief in opportunity and a constant battle – long and hard — to extend the benefits of the American dream to all – without regard to circumstances of birth."
               
               A rich white male is not going to be able to sell that to the voters who have turned away from the Republican party and who believe it to represent all that the Democrats have painted it to be. But Condoleezza Rice could, those are her exact words at the 2012 RNC, and when she speaks them, people believe her:
               
               "And on a personal note– a little girl grows up in Jim Crow Birmingham – the most segregated big city in America - her parents can’t take her to a movie theater or a restaurant – but they make her believe that even though she can’t have a hamburger at the Woolworth’s lunch counter – she can be President of the United States and she becomes the Secretary of State.
               
               Yes, America has a way of making the impossible seem inevitable in retrospect. But of course it has never been inevitable – it has taken leadership, courage and an unwavering faith in our values."
               
               Condoleezza Rice can say those things, can speak to America, and the Democrats will have nowhere to go against her. Certainly they will not be able to say she is anti-women's rights, nor will they be able to say she is out of touch with struggling Americans, and that she would not be able to relate to the hardships they face. She has lived through those hardships, and succeeded in spite of all the obstacles placed before her.
               
               It's not the message the Republicans need to change so much as the person who is delivering it to America.
               
               The only problem with this, is she has no desire to be President.
               
               "I don't have the DNA to run for office," she said. "I love policy. I don't really like politics. When you have had a chance to be the nation's chief diplomat, that's enough. I'm happy as a professor at Stanford."
               
               A tragedy if true, for she is uniquely qualified to handle post-Obama years... more so than any other candidate that the Republicans are likely to come up with.
               
               Before George Bush ever became president, Rice wrote a essay entitled "Promoting the National Interest." Her prescription for a new U.S. foreign policy centered on a critique of Clinton policy, which she argued was disconnected from U.S. national interests and was tied too closely to multilateral concerns, something that Obama is even more guilty of.
               
               "Foreign policy in a Republican administration will proceed from the firm ground of the national interest, not from the interests of an illusory international community," she wrote. According to Rice, "multilateral agreements and institutions should not be ends in themselves" and measures enacted should not constrain U.S. national interests. The United States, she argued, should return to the core principle that "power matters." Rice asserted that rather than "exercising power legitimately only when doing so on behalf of someone else," the United States should focus solely on pursuing its national interest. The "second-order effect" of this pursuit, she said, would be that the rest of the world would benefit.
               
               That is the mindset I want in the Commander-in-Chief, the exact opposite philosophy which has been enacted by the Obama Administration, which is more than willing to ignore America's best interests when acting abroad.
               
               ----
               
               Looking back, things have become considerably worse... economically, world relations, national social civility and cohesiveness.
               
               The difference in quality and capability of leadership from the likes of what we had running the country in 2003 to what we have now in 2023 is so fundamentally different, its like the difference between having Elon Musk and his Space X team running your space program vs. Richard Branson and his Virgin Atlantic.
               
               The difference in capability and performance is substantial, to say the least.

               replyreport
               1. 86

                  tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  hmmm . . . a lot to digest while saying thanks for something to ponder. Interestingly, two people I admire with great respect are Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell, RIP.

                  replyreport
               2. 80

                  Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "Ours has never been a narrative of grievance and entitlement. We have not believed that I am doing poorly because you are doing well. We have not been envious of one another and jealous of each other’s success. Ours has been a belief in opportunity and a constant battle – long and hard — to extend the benefits of the American dream to all – without regard to circumstances of birth."
                  
                  Then what is with this "white male grievance" that you have been talking about?
                  ------
                  "It's not the message the Republicans need to change so much as the person who is delivering it to America."
                  
                  
                  No, regarding their handling stance on social issues and their busybody politics, yes, the message needs to change. Whether the message is delivered by male or female, black or white, will not change anything. Condelezza Rice is not going to embrace the "Handsmaiden's Tale" values as her very life is very the contrary of all of that. She is not going to play along. That "blackface stuff" is not going to work.
                  
                  I am sure that Dr. Rice has more than enough foreign policy experience, but neo-conservatives would rather rattle sabers over some mindless ideological bent.
                  --------
                  " the United States should focus solely on pursuing its national interest. The "second-order effect" of this pursuit, she said, would be that the rest of the world would benefit."
                  
                  Would I agree with that, I say no. Because we pursue our own national interests, the interests of others which from their perspective are just as valid are to be discarded. It an arrogance in attitude in the use of American power that will create challenges and resentment, earhwise. Who made you boss?
                  
                  But, She is bett r than any GOP candidate running now, but with an attitude as shown from your quote, she is still too "rightwing" for me.
                  ------
                  "She has lived through those hardships, and succeeded in spite of all the obstacles placed before her."
                  
                  Every now and then someone wins the powerball, would I consider shaping my life around receiving the winning ticket? I would say not. There is nothing wrong with bringing non merit based obstacles under control, as we all don't want to have to climb Mt Everest relative to the anthill whites have to just step over. We all should not have to imitate her struggle to acquire opportunity.
                  
                  I will take Obama over any Republican, his style and objectives and ideology were more in line with my values.

                  replyreport
         2. 80

            Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            It is not just Trump,but the direction of the Republican Party in general.  Dr. Rice would not touch it with a ten foot pole.
            
            You conservatives consider Trump, as dastardly as he is, as a better choice than Biden, I simply do not. And as bad as things are perceived to be, they can become several magnitudes worse with Republicans at the helm, IMHO.
            
            You don't seem like a Condelezza Rice type, I will try and see if I can't read your article.

            replyreport
            1. 70

               Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

               It was a poorly written article, worsened by the fact that I 'moderated' and updated it years later. 
               
               Some of the thoughts proved true enough, and some of your concerns proved out as well.
               
               All of the many failings and tribulations we have seen the past seven years I believe would have been much negated (or never contrived) had Rice been our President during that time.
               
               I believe the quality of people who would have served in her Administration would have been much better, much brighter and been held accountable.
               
               So much of the divisiveness that is being inflamed today would be nullified.  The right person at the right time can move the entire world in a better direction... and the wrong person at the wrong time can make things so much worse.
               
               We had a very divisive president in Trump... on top of that the opposition made him out to be every form of villain possible, doing its best to drive America into a frenzy to be rid of him... it worked in spades, on half the nation.
               
               He was followed up with another divisive president, that has acted as if half the country is the enemy, while opening the borders for millions to flow in, and emptying the coffers for his endless war against an enemy that cannot be defeated unless we go and fight it with our troops... and we will pay a terrible price for that decision when he makes it.
               
               If Trump is a bad apple... Biden is a poisoned one... and one following the other does not do the country's digestion any good at all, it might quite literally mean the death of the nation as we know it.

               replyreport
      3. 85

         Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

         Cred,
         
         So --- I note you did not share who your dream president would be. if you could choose who would be the next Democratic candidate?

         replyreport
         1. 80

            Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I don't really have any Democratic star that rises to the occasion right now among palatable choices. What choices there are, too many lean to the
            The Right and would be spoilers that I can Ill afford. Out of sheer fear of a Republican resurgence, I will stick with Biden.

            replyreport
            1. 85

               Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

               Have you considered Josh Shapiro?   He seems to be well-liked, well-educated, a man of the people.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  Josh Shapiro? I will check him out and get back to you.
                  
                  Yes, he presses all the correct buttons and I could support his candidacy, but not as a spoiler making it possible for Republicans to win.

                  replyreport
                  1. 85

                     Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                     Josh Shapiro has been noted for upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice for the people of Pennsylvania. When he was the state's Attorney General, he worked to protect consumers, prosecute criminals, and advocate for the rights of individuals and communities. He has taken significant steps to combat the opioid epidemic in Pennsylvania.
                     Throughout his career, Shapiro has shown a real dedication to protecting vulnerable populations, including senior citizens, children, and victims of abuse. He has established programs and initiatives aimed at safeguarding the rights and well-being of minorities.
                     
                     He has been a proponent of government transparency and accountability and has worked to ensure that government officials and agencies operate ethically and efficiently,  he has also taken action against corruption and fraud.
                     
                     Shapiro has shown a real concern for the environment and has taken steps to protect it. He has been involved in various environmental initiatives aimed at addressing climate change, conserving natural resources, and ensuring clean water and air for Pennsylvanians. He is a doer, not just a talker.
                     
                     The people of Penn, seem to appreciate him, and his leadership.  He is seen to be only slightly left of the middle. Although he has only been Gov for a short time his job poll is high over 62%. This guy would likely pull some Republican votes.
                     
                     I think Americans are looking for brand new...  Is it not time to ask more of your party than Biden?   Come on, should we not be demanding more than a warm body, I mean sort of warm?  Are you really satisfied with settling because that's what your party dictates you to do? 
                     
                     If we continue down this path of showing complete obedience we are in trouble --- this goes for both parties.
                     
                     My OP is going to prove we may be on that path, I mean it is disappointing that it appears very hard for one to even dream of a perfect candidate.  To even just play the game, of choosing an ideal person you would like to see in the White House.  I think this is very unfortunate, and shows our society is either non-caring or dumbed down to a great extent.
                     
                     I had hoped this OP would have us sharing the qualities we desired in a President.  It well seems no one could come up with a living human being that they admired enough to offer up as the perfect person to send to the White House.

                     replyreport
                     1. 80

                        Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                        I don't trust Trump or the Republicans, that has to be first and foremost, keeping them out of power. Only after that danger is abated do I have the luxury of considering any alternative to Biden.
                        
                        Unfortunately, much of my voting patterns are negatively driven.

                        replyreport
                        1. 85

                           Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                           You have misunderstood the OP... How to say this  ---- This is just a game, I hoped you would share someone that you admired, and that you felt would make the perfect president. If you could choose, and your choice was the final say.  Who would you like to see as president?  Does not matter who it is, it could be anyone.
                           
                           I think Americans are looking for brand new...  Is it not time to ask more of your party than Biden?   Come on, should we not be demanding more than a warm body, I mean sort of warm?  Are you really satisfied with settling because that's what your party dictates you to do? The same goes for the Republican party.
                           
                           If we continue down this path of showing complete obedience we are in trouble --- this goes for both parties.
                           
                           My OP is going to prove we may be on that path, I mean it is disappointing that it appears very hard for one to even dream of a perfect candidate.  To even just play the game, of choosing an ideal person you would like to see in the White House.  I think this is very unfortunate, and shows our society is either non-caring or dumbed down to a great extent.
                           
                           I had hoped this OP would have us sharing the qualities we desired in a President. Not debating two candidates that have lots of baggage.
                           
                           It well seems no one could come up with a living human being that they admired enough to offer up as the perfect person to send to the White House.

                           replyreport
                           1. 80

                              Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                              Anyone? JFK, Abraham Lincoln, Barack Obama.
                              
                              There can really be no ideal candidate. I liked Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, they would be probably among the few that I would support without misgivings

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 Willowarborposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                 I would totally support Bernie or Warren.  I think that it would be refreshing to see the country guided by the left of center.  Either of them are a better bet than the failed businessman with multiple indictments. If I were to remain in the center I think Amy Klobuchar and Jamie Raskin are very impressive

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 80

                                    Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                    nice to hear from you. Another case of the "Blue Flu".
                                    
                                    it comes down to integrity, as you say. The appearance of impropriety to the extent that we see with the failed businessman with multiple indictments is not consistent with presidential timber, but more like particle board.
                                    
                                    I certainly can live with Amy Klobuchar or even Josh Shipiro would do.

                                    replyreport
                              2. 85

                                 Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                 I am pleased you came up with two that you admire and would like to see in the White House.  That's all I was aiming for. Your choice helps me get to the root of what you desire and your ideologies. I feel the two you choose to represent the fellow I have come to know. And yes, I can see that Bernie and Warren would suit your ideologies and hopes for the direction you feel positive about. 
                                 
                                 Does this indicate you are not a true Biden fan, but he would be who you are left with, due to him sharing a bit of what you need in a president?

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 80

                                    Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                    It is all a matter of degree, I have to settle as my preferred choice has been elusive since Barack Obama.
                                    
                                    Yes, Mr. Biden is who I am left with, who despite problems and issues, is far better than alternatives offered by the "otherside". An appreciation of my ideological stand would make that evident for any observer.

                                    replyreport
                           2. 70

                              Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                              I think C. Rice has been brought up, and she had been long ago, but she wants nothing to do with it.
                              
                              Tulsi Gabbard would have been better than what we have today by far as well, but she has no chance.  Her stance on not wanting to continue America's foreign Nation Rebuilding' efforts we have seen the last 30 years made sure she would have plenty of people undermining her efforts.

                              replyreport
                              1. 85

                                 Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                 Tulsi Gabbard would be right up there with Rice in my book. Tulsi in my view would make a good president. She is all about America, and you know, feel at this time we need a president that is all about America first. We agree that the great experiment is all but done, and not even on life support at this time.
                                 
                                 I have shared I think we have one last shot... 2024 will be it.

                                 replyreport
                        2. 70

                           Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                           The only issue I have with that, is that Biden isn't better for the country, never was, and this is being proven out, unfortunately.
                           
                           He might be better for hurt feelings, he might be better to keep the MSM from losing their minds... but for the economy, foreign affairs, border issues, he is a complete disaster for the present and future of America.

                           replyreport
                           1. 80

                              Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                              We disagree, while Biden is not my ideal choice, he is better than any alternative from the GOP.
                              
                              Such is my opinion.

                              replyreport
                              1. 70

                                 Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                 I know, the more you stick with it, the more it flies in the face of reality.
                                 
                                 The war on Russia, the unending wars in the Middle East, the economy on its last leg, and the flood of humanity at the border.
                                 
                                 That there are plenty such as yourself that find this Administration acceptable is a clear sign to me that my outlook is spot on.
                                 
                                 Trust me, your position is not nearly as disappointing as the highly intelligent in-laws I have that soak up whatever MSNBC spews forth like sponges. 
                                 
                                 I am under no illusion as to where this is leading the country.  I am getting my popcorn ready to watch as Rome burns.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 83

                                    gmwilliamsposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                    I will bring the hot dogs Ken.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 81

                                       Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                       We must not give up Hope.
                                       Hope that truth and justice will prevail. We need superman. If we want him, he will come.
                                       
                                       Perhaps "him" means, "The Superman/Superwoman within each of us."

                                       report
                     2. 86

                        tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                        Maybe going off topic, maybe not. The catch-22 is if my choices are alive today and/or in my view in the right age bracket. For instance I would put Lee Iaccoca on my list to consider. Or, if going international I would put Angela Merkel on my list. For me, most would be too old by my own standards or are dead, RIP. 
                        
                        My age bracket would be no younger than forty-five and no older than sixty. That would be one qualifier. So, what are other qualifiers. More than likely I would lean right before left. However, as an No Party Preference voter it would be a matter of compare/constrast while considering where are nation is 'right now'.
                        
                        I would consider persons not necessarily a political leader in the sense of being a populist. I would consider governance. I like your suggested Shapiro. I would prefer/like someone to lead our nation not divide it further or lead it into the depths of hell.
                        
                        That would be someone to solve today's challenges and with as much importance institute change for the future. And, considers the full spectrum and is not narrowed into one bucket.
                        
                        Where our nation is right now for me has priorities. At the moment the top eight are:
                        
                        The economy
                        Foreign relations
                        Defense
                        The border
                        Race/ethnic relations
                        Education
                        The environment (Climate change, energy, and land usage/management)
                        Homelessness
                        
                        As one may discover they are a mix of right and left priorities. It is hard for me to discover someone to fit those. I would look for persons who are good with organizational skills, are innovative, future orientated or one might say visionary, and have character traits I value. But, at this time I see many that are populists seeking selfishness and power. Maybe that is because of the media. Or, as said earlier, I am just plain weird.

                        replyreport
                        1. 85

                           Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                           I see that my original post may not have been clear in its intentions. Firstly, my aim was to gauge how people would react when given the opportunity to select their ideal president – a real person whom they would like to see in the White House. Secondly, I wanted to determine if anyone could make a choice if the opportunity arose.  (I mean who would not want to be the final say?)
                           
                           If someone couldn't identify a single individual they wholeheartedly supported as a president, what might that reflect about our society? I had initially omitted specifying that this person should be alive and well. (My Bad)
                           
                           I intended to grant users the complete freedom to choose who they believe would make an excellent president – someone they genuinely admired. (again seems to be a hard task)
                           
                           Based on what I've observed so far, it appears that there have been no takers. Could this suggest that those participating here might not find anyone they admire enough to be their choice? Or does it hint at the possibility that we have a limited number of individuals in our society who are considered worthy of being a good president?

                           replyreport
                           1. 86

                              tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                              Okay . . . I guess, I don't know, Oh well, Oops! My apologies!!
                              
                              Since reading that reply I have been mulling over in my head for an off-the-cuff answer for a choice. The only one that pops into my mind is Mitch Daniels, yet he falls outside of my age preference shared earlier. He may lean more right than I prefer, yet his achievements are in areas of my concern.
                              
                              I learned about him when I learned about the Committee for a Responsible Budget. He is a co-chair. I was intrigued and then read biographical articles on him. Many on that board are leaders one may consider while they represent, conservatives, liberals, and independents.
                              
                              Committee for a Responsible Budget Board Members
                              https://www.crfb.org/board-members
                              
                              Following is a dialogue by Politico with him. (08/19/22)
                              
                              A Nice-Guy Conservative Emerges From Political Self-Exile
                              Mitch Daniels was the voice of Republicans until he quit politics for higher ed. He is speaking out again, but is his gentlemanly brand too out of favor?
                              
                              https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ … e-00052797
                              
                              Note: I will ponder the last two questions.

                              replyreport
                              1. 85

                                 Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                 Fantastic interview! Daniels has been sorely missed. It's quite evident that you could envision supporting Mitch Daniels. In my view, he truly reflects your temperament and seems to share many of your core beliefs. So, selecting a potential presidential candidate you'd like to see wasn't as challenging as it may seem.
                                 
                                 I've consistently admired Mitch, but his absence from politics made me forget about him. He did mention Ben Sasse.  Ben Sasse was on my list of contenders, right below Rice.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 86

                                    tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                                    Thanks, Sharlee! I won't quibble if it was challenging or not. As said, it was an off-the-cuff name/person that popped into my head perhaps governed by spontaneity rather than assessing for my criteria shared earlier. In other words, he in my mind is too old.
                                    
                                    However, as you pointed out I can tick off a lot of my boxes with him too, though those are core conservative/Republican values I listed. I would give him the benefit of knowing about education and it is a priority since he was president of Perdue.
                                    
                                    Along with that as president of Pedue, I bet he is well acquainted with racial/ethnic disparities and is empathetic to them. I don't know? With a bit of research, I see he is a critic of climate change, so a big fat zero in that box. So, does he really fit my criteria from the overall standpoint?

                                    replyreport
   2. 86

      tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Rice in my eyes is a fantastic choice. Have you read any of the articles where she shares why she won't run? I have read a few a few years back. Revealing!!
      
      I take a sense of pride in her for many reasons. Not only a success as Secretary of State. But, she is a professor at Stanford. My grandpa graduated from there and I was accepted to attend there after high school. 
      
      To stimulate my old guy memory banks I went on a little hunt to skim a few articles on why she will not run for president. I discovered and read the following article on Democracy from back in 2017. I am now being introspective on it while thinking:
      
      ** About both parties with their adherents
      ** How change has occurred related to the world in the context of 2017
      ** How change has occurred related to our nation in the context of 2017
      ** Democracy in general
      ** The sentiment that it is threatened today by the political machinery we have today.
      
      Condoleezza Rice: Why Democracy is Worth the Effort published at the Bush Center. It is a Q&A. Definitely worth a skim to read each question and then decide to read that answer. That is what I did. 
      https://www.bushcenter.org/catalyst/dem … cys-health
      
      As far as my choice for a president I would follow along the line of Dr. Frankenstein. I would pick from this one and that one and come up with the perfect one. I would start with Jefferson, include Lincoln, toss in Teddy Roosevelt and his cousin FDR, and definitely bring Kennedy into the mix.  There are others I would consider. Eisenhower is a good choice. Hesitantly Clinton. He understood a balanced budget.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

         So --- It seems you would prefer to clone a president. Is there not one living person you feel could represent America as president?

         replyreport
         1. 86

            tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Not clone, start fresh at the drawing board.
            
            Speaking from my 'ego', me of course. Yet, I am woefully inexperienced, brimming with ignorance of all the knowledge needed, have old-guy memory challenges, and have enough wellness challenges to throw a monkey wrench in the works.
            
            Otherwise, not off the top of my head do I know of someone living today that would fit my ideal. I have become too critical over the years seeing too many flaws. A blessing or a curse one must decide.
            
            I can point to someone on a particular issue, someone with knowledge and experience in a specific area, or somebody with character traits I admire, but at this time I am not able to point to one person with all of those along with other elements.

            replyreport
            1. 85

               Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

               Your assistance has allowed me to highlight a concern I anticipated would emerge with this original post (OP). It raises questions about our society's ability to select an individual we believe possesses positive qualities to lead the United States. What does this situation reveal about our society as a whole?
               
               You have shared you could come up with qualities that you feel would make a good president --- But could not point to any one person.
               I found it interesting no one could come up with a person they well respected, and might make a good president. Very interesting...

               replyreport
               1. 70

                  Ken Burgessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  I think 2015-2020 exposed plenty of truths about our society and our ability to choose who leads the country.
                  
                  You can start with Sanders and Clinton.
                  
                  Sanders had more support, more votes... didn't matter... the DNC/Democrat-Party is rigged with Super Delegates and a very corrupt internal control authority structure, beholden to donors that want the worst for America and its society... their puppet Clinton got the nomination.
                  
                  Trump was able to win the Republican Nomination, despite severe resistance from the RNC and most Republican politicians, they debated taking the nomination from him... I think they relented because ultimately they thought he would lose, Clinton was inevitable in their minds, she certainly would have defeated any other nominee the Republicans could muster up.
                  
                  People who bought into all the Trump hate... like Credence does... forget that he was despised by the DC/establishment Republicans before he became the nominee.   
                  
                  Trump exposed the facade, he showed how little difference there was between Pelosi and McCain, between Ryan and Schumer, there is none... they ultimately all bow down to the corporations, donors, elites all are prioritized ahead of the Nation and its citizens.

                  replyreport
                  1. 80

                     Credence2posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                     Ken, I don't buy into anything, the man that you would have be King has shown the nation's his true colors.
                     
                     Trump is disntinctly a plutocrat against unions, collective bargaining and the working citizen. His lies would make it appear to the contrary.
                     
                     Trump, has tried to usurp the American government by illegally attempting to change the Counting of votes for the electoral college selections on January 6th. As the vile serpent that he is, of course he lies about his role. But January 6th did not occur in a vacuum, despite the smoke screen set up by the Right. NOBODY breaks the rules without my distrust and suspicion as to their motives for doing so.
                     
                     Trump is an ignorant, coarse buffoon, that does not know nor appreciate Democracy and the rule of law, which is a mere inconvenience for him. He is a race baiter, petty, cowardly, arrogant. These character traits are quite evident to all that takes a close look, but  the rightwinger remains willfully blinded by seance. 
                     
                     So, yes, I hate advocates of the above, that would apply to anyone. So, you can take the "emotional" argument and stow it. There, besides me, are plenty of rational people on the left that see Trump for the tyrant and the danger that he represents. As, I say some of us do not easily swoon over tyrants, smitten like a teenager in the presence of a celebrity.
                     
                     I can never be sold on neither Trump nor MAGA..... and that goes for the GOP establishment as well, to a slightly lesser extent.

                     replyreport
               2. 86

                  tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  You know, Sharlee, it may well be a matter of age, maturity, wisdom acquired, and possibly having obtained those have a greater BS detector. And, less willing to put up with the BS promoted and advocated by those seeking votes.
                  
                  Perhaps through learning or evolution, a new nature of suspicion of motives. I confess I have become more of a skeptic with less dogmatism. Then, again, many have said I am just plain weird.
                  
                  Somewhat critical is that I see less authenticity and integrity these days in our leaders or supposed leaders may be phrasing it better. For example, who do you know has those qualities to the extent that Rice does? The closest in my view is Haley. I wouldn't even care if she was a Democrat, I would consider her for my vote based on those.
                  
                  With thought, we as elders, have that as a luxury! The youth have to pay for it at a cost and those in the middle usually weigh things out prudently having learned there is a risk and reward element with decisions. However, politics is a game unto itself, right?

                  replyreport
2. 60

   Willowarborposted 12 months ago

   The sad state of our country is that whomever is elected will be torn down  based on the simple fact that the r or d box is not checked.  We don't have a whole lot of critical thinkers here in America today. It is abundantly clear on this forum. Many just want to stay in their box, in their Lane. They feel better about being part of a team rather than thinking through the nuances of any candidate. It's really all reduced to this or that party, good or evil, right or wrong, binary thinking to the hilt. Some just try to masquerade as critical thinkers but you can see through it pretty quickly. Politicians have people right where they want them, divided up into non-thinking tribes.  Politicians today have people thinking in the most simplistic ways ever.

   replyreport
3. 60

   Willowarborposted 12 months ago

   My choice would not likely be from the Republican party. They have become far too extreme and out of touch.  They've also made it abundantly clear that they are unable to legislate in any meaningful manner and their conference is completely shattered as evidenced by the ongoing speaker troubles.  Why would I put someone in the White House from their ranks?
   Trump has completely eviscerated the party. 
   
   And their speaker choice?  Abhorrent. 
   
   As an attorney and former spokesperson for the conservative Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, Now Speaker Johnson,  authored op-eds that advocated for the criminalization of gay sex and suggested that legalizing same-sex marriage could lead to people marrying their pets.
   
   In Congress, Johnson voted against the passage of the Respect for Marriage Act and the Equality Act on several occasions.
   
   Why are Republicans so hellbent on taking away rights and limiting people? 
   
   Johnson isn’t just wrong on the issues of LGBTQ rights, voting rights, abortion and gun safety.  He’s been obsessed with restricting people’s freedoms, rolling back progress and see's no need for separation of church & state. Not to mention he played a key role in the House’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
   
   In picking Mike Johnson, ‘moderate’ House Republicans showed that they’re comfortable being led by a man who comes straight from the extreme fringe of their party.
   
   None of these people belong anywhere near the White House.   My desire is to elect a president that won't try and drag us backward 200 years.

   replyreport
4. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months ago

   Mike Johnson is a breath of fresh air. If you listen to his speeches with ears to hear, you will recognize his sincerity and concern for the rights of the American people ... such as the right of their tax money to NOT be squandered for un-winnable wars. The right to a border which is CLOSED and PROTECTED for the benefit of the nation. The right to JUSTICE and the American way which includes true representation of the PEOPLE!

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Willowarborposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Oh he's a real gem all right.
      
      He wants a nationwide ban on abortion.
      
      He blamed abortion for school shootings as well as the need for cuts in Medicare and social security.
      
      He blamed mass shootings on the teaching of evolution.
      
      He fought to ban same-sex marriage in Louisiana.
      
      He was an advocate for covenant marriage which makes it more difficult to get a divorce.
      
      He doesn't believe in separation of church and state.
      
      He has written a plethora of hate filled speeches against gay people. Not just that he's against the lifestyle but wants it criminalized.
      
      
      This may be all good and well for you but not for most of us out here, but we don't want government involved in our lives to this degree. This man has probably actually one of the most extreme members of Congress.
      
      
      https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article … facts.html

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months agoin reply to this

         He is for the rights of the unborn.
         
         The teaching of evolution discounts the divine role and hand of a Creator.
         
         Same sex marriage is an abomination to MANY, as in the majority.
         
         Divorce is the ruination of families, and leads parents away from the foundation of the American dream and the wholesome development of children.
         
         He does believe in the separation of church and state: State must stay AWAY from Church and let Church have Freedom of Speech.
         
         The gay lifestyle leads to evil minority factions who care nothing for the rights of the straight.

         replyreport
         1. 86

            tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            hurmph . . .

            replyreport
            1. 81

               Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months agoin reply to this

               I win.

               replyreport
               1. 86

                  tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  How can that be if there was no contest?

                  replyreport
                  1. 81

                     Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                     There always is. You pretty much forfeited.

                     replyreport
                     1. 86

                        tsmogposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                        

                        replyreport
         2. 85

            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Thank you so much... So well put.

            replyreport
         3. 60

            Willowarborposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Sorry I don't want the government regulating or dictating any of that to me.
            
            The gay lifestyle leads to evil minority factions who care nothing for the rights of the straight.
            
            LOL. Just wow. Seems like it's the other way around. Republican zealots like MAGA  Mike want to take rights away from gay people. How are the rights of straight people being violated in any way whatsoever? He's advocated for criminalizing their lifestyle.

            replyreport
   2. 85

      Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

      All you said and more --- he is a constitutionalist, and he practiced in constitutional law... Love this

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
      2. 60

         Willowarborposted 12 months agoin reply to this

         I'd love to know where he finds support for all of his extreme positions in the constitution?

         replyreport