Ship of Fools: Needed for High Office

Thread: Needed for High Office Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=029119

Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :

Here in the U.S., we are in the early days of yet another presidential election. As usual, various people want the job. I think a reasonable question to ask is this:

What qualities and background do you regard as important in a candidate for high public office? ("High public office" might be U.S. president or prime minister of Canada or mayor of London.) Mind you, I'm not asking about who is eligible (usually a low bar), but about who is qualified by virtue of personal characteristics, formal education, previous public service, etc.

Posted by itsarumdo (# 18174) on :

I read a scifi novel a few decades ago that proposed

a) a list of suitably qualified candidates is kept and subjected to a random selection process

b) anyone who wants the post should be removed form the list

Posted by irish_lord99 (# 16250) on :

Apparently its important that they be born in the country they wish to lead... unless they're Republicans. [Confused]

quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
b) anyone who wants the post should be removed form the list

I would agree, because I don't see how any sane person would want to be President or Prime Minister: sanity should be a prerequisite IMO. [Big Grin]

On a more serious note, I think in the US the ability to build bridges between the two parties to reach compromise is important.

Previous experience in government is a must. Most of my dissatisfaction with our current POTUS could probably be traced back to his lack of experience governing.

Military experience for the Commander-in-Chief is a plus, but not necessary, IMO.

-------

*Said somewhat tongue in cheek, but I have yet to hear a valid justification why Ted Cruz is given a pass even though he was obviously born in Canada, and Obama was put under so much scrutiny because he was 'born in Kenya'. Both had American mothers and foreign fathers.

Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :

quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
...
On a more serious note, I think in the US the ability to build bridges between the two parties to reach compromise is important.

...

Or between the US and Canada - literally and figuratively.

Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on :

quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:

quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
...
On a more serious note, I think in the US the ability to build bridges between the two parties to reach compromise is important.

...
Or between the US and Canada - literally and figuratively.

Literally???

I thought the border between Canada and the US was the longest land border in the world. Quite where you would put a bridge is interesting. Quite WHY you would need a bridge is even more interesting.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

Most of Ontario's border with the US is water. The two busiest land crossings in Eastern Canada are bridges: The Peace Bridge in Fort Erie and the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor.

Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Most of Ontario's border with the US is water. The two busiest land crossings in Eastern Canada are bridges: The Peace Bridge in Fort Erie and the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor.

So those bridges are already there. Still not sure about the need for more literal bridges...
[Razz]

Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:

quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Most of Ontario's border with the US is water. The two busiest land crossings in Eastern Canada are bridges: The Peace Bridge in Fort Erie and the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor.
So those bridges are already there. Still not sure about the need for more literal bridges...

There is a desperate need for a new bridge between Detroit and Windsor.

Oh, and a pipeline. [Biased]

Posted by Teilhard (# 16342) on :

No substitute for good character ...

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

Looking at our election over hear, and following the path of the presidential hopefuls across the pond, I've come up with the following essential list of the qualities required for anyone seeking high office:

The hide of a rhinocerous.
To be single. Allowed to have had a monogamous love-life in the past but with all previous partners deceased - but dying months after the split, preferably only when they'd formed another significant attachment.
To have only ever worked as an employee of an NGO and having had no responsibility either for handling funds or for making spending decisions.
To be reasonably attractive but not so beautiful that they could be accused of vanity or narcissism.
To have only ever attended state (public) schools and non-Ivy League universities.
Be able to show a record of academic achievement.
Sufficient hobbies and pasttimes that they can be considered 'well-rounded' but not so many that it could attract criticism for them spending too much time on them. It goes without saying that none of these leisure activities should be of the type that the average man couldn't afford them.
Profess no religion but be able to be described as 'spiritual'.
Ideally they'll be hermaphrodite but, since that might attract the charge of being 'freakish', the best is to be of one sex but professing loudly (and showing) that they're in touch with their masculine/feminine (delete as applicable) side.
To have no record of any law-breaking of any kind, ever - not even a caution for drunk and disorderly.
To have only ever supported causes or people with an equally blameless record.
To either be an only-child orphan OR to have parents and siblings with all of the above qualities, or close to them.

And I haven't even included the others - such as someone willing to have their every action and utterance scrutinised and then spotlighted in the media with the worst possible gloss/rationale always applied to everything they do or say, from what they wear to what cereal they eat for breakfast.

Posted by lowlands_boy (# 12497) on :

Here in the UK, there is a campaign underway to ask all declared candidates to upload their CV for public scrutiny.

Democracy Club CV campaign

I think that's quite a good idea, as rather than trying to decide what qualities I think might be important, and missing something, I can just read all about the candidates experience and decide if they are a good fit.

Posted by beatmenace (# 16955) on :

irish_lord99 said

quote:
I would agree, because I don't see how any sane person would want to be President or Prime Minister: sanity should be a prerequisite IMO.

From what I have seen so far, the RepubliKKKans have an unassailable lead in not having any sane person wanting to be President.

Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on :

quote:
Originally posted by beatmenace:
From what I have seen so far, the RepubliKKKans have an unassailable lead in not having any sane person wanting to be President.

I'm sure you are aware that the Klan was a Dimocrat outfit, right?

Their last Senator Klansman only died in 2010, and was the longest serving member in the history of Congress at the time.

Republicans are certainly shite, but the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, and the Klan belongs to the DimoKKKrats.

[ 25. March 2015, 14:19: Message edited by: romanlion ]

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

The candidate who agrees with me the most has the only qualifications needed to be president. Everybody is the world should hold political candidates to that standard. On every single issue, candidates should be asked, "Do you agree with Beeswax Altar?" The world would be a better place.

Yes we can! [Yipee]

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:

quote:
Originally posted by beatmenace:
From what I have seen so far, the RepubliKKKans have an unassailable lead in not having any sane person wanting to be President.
I'm sure you are aware that the Klan was a Dimocrat outfit, right?

Their last Senator Klansman only died in 2010, and was the longest serving member in the history of Congress at the time.

Republicans are certainly shite, but the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, and the Klan belongs to the DimoKKKrats.

Southern Democrats were not real Democrats, they voted as a bloc with the Republicans in Congress. Politically the South wouldn't tolerate politicians named by the party of Lincoln and the Reconstruction both of which, in Southern opinion, aggressively destroyed the South.

The amazing change is that the South now embraces the Republican Party in name too, not only in racial and anti-social welfare policies as previously. The South never embraced Democratic party policies.

[ 25. March 2015, 16:55: Message edited by: Belle Ringer ]

Posted by Fool (# 18359) on :

I think aspiring politicians require integrity, an enquiring mind, the ability to organise and eloquence.

They must be able to sort the wheat from the chaff to work out what is important and what is niff naff and trivia.

They must have a moral compass and I tend to distrust people who's moral compass is skewed by what they think some one else's imaginary chum might want them to do. I'm not saying I wouldn't vote for a religionist but certainly wouldn't vote for some one who thinks god answers him/her when he/she speakes to them.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

An aspiring politician needs to have done all of their reading and travelling by the time they run for office-- they won't have a minute unallocated afterward. Some of the worst decision-making I have seen comes from the perpetrator not having understood the context of their action and its implication. If they had but spent two months' backpacking, another two wooffing, and a year at a foreign university, with a month or two thrown in helping in a refugee camp, they would have understood the world around them, and the impact of decisions.

And the reading, in depth and of anything, gives a rhythm to their thought and expression. The more classics, the better (IMHO), to understand how men and decisions and the flow of history operates, but at a remove-- it need not be of Greece and Rome, and seeing how resources and neighbours touched (say) the Aztecs, and how the record was shaped by those who won, helps a decision-maker to see the context of the world within which we operate.

The ideal candidate would also have another language, in sufficient depth to read poems as it is often the case that the knowledge of a second language helps one to understand how one's first language operates. As well, knowing that there are other ways to see and describe the world broadens the vision of the decision-maker.

The fourth essential qualification, of course, is that they agree with me on every detail of policy and administration, but that goes without saying.

Posted by Drewthealexander (# 16660) on :

It does depend a little on the job. For Mayor of London you need to be something of a political oddball....

For other high office, the ability to select and run a team of diverse skills is essential, given the complexity of the issues you will face. In many counsellors there is much wisdom, providing you choose your counsellors carefully.

Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :

Since it is high office about which we speak, perhaps one needs a prescription for medical marijuana.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0