Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It occurred to me that America has not elected a Republican that was a US Senator in the era since WW2.
F. D. Roosevelt ( D)
H. S. Truman ( D)
D.D. Eisenhower (R) Supreme Commander Allied Forces EU
J.F. Kennedy ( D)
L.B. Johnson ( D)
R.M. Nixon ( R) V.P. Eisenhower administration, US HoR, US Sen
G. R. Ford ( R) V.P. Nixon Appointed
J.E. Carter ( D)
R. Reagan ( R) Gov. California
G.H.W. Bush ( R) V.P. Reagan, US Congress
W. J. Clinton ( D)
G.W. Bush ( R) Gov. Texas
B. H. Obama (D)
There seems to be riff froming in the GOP between Rebublican Govenors and Legislators. Seems the Govenors are saying that they are the proven leaders. That the GOP Governors have to lead and do the day to day job of Running thier State's government, while GOP legislators just talk.
Do you believe a GOP govenor is a better choice for President than a Republican Congressional legislator?
It occurred to me that America has not elected a Republican that was a US Senator in the era since WW2.
F. D. Roosevelt ( D)
H. S. Truman ( D)
D.D. Eisenhower (R) Supreme Commander Allied Forces EU
J.F. Kennedy ( D)
L.B. Johnson ( D)
R.M. Nixon ( R) V.P. Eisenhower administration, US HoR, US Sen
G. R. Ford ( R) V.P. Nixon Appointed
J.E. Carter ( D)
R. Reagan ( R) Gov. California
G.H.W. Bush ( R) V.P. Reagan, US Congress
W. J. Clinton ( D)
G.W. Bush ( R) Gov. Texas
B. H. Obama (D)
There seems to be riff froming in the GOP between Rebublican Govenors and Legislators. Seems the Govenors are saying that they are the proven leaders. That the GOP Governors have to lead and do the day to day job of Running thier State's government, while GOP legislators just talk.
Do you believe a GOP govenor is a better choice for President than a Republican Congressional legislator?
You could techinally say almost the same thing of the Democrats in that time period. Only JFK and Obama moved directly from the Senate to the Presidency. All the other democrats had a stint in the VP spot or were Governors prior to assuming the presidency.
It occurred to me that America has not elected a Republican that was a US Senator in the era since WW2.
F. D. Roosevelt ( D)
H. S. Truman ( D)
D.D. Eisenhower (R) Supreme Commander Allied Forces EU
J.F. Kennedy ( D)
L.B. Johnson ( D)
R.M. Nixon ( R) V.P. Eisenhower administration, US HoR, US Sen
G. R. Ford ( R) V.P. Nixon Appointed
J.E. Carter ( D)
R. Reagan ( R) Gov. California
G.H.W. Bush ( R) V.P. Reagan, US Congress
W. J. Clinton ( D)
G.W. Bush ( R) Gov. Texas
B. H. Obama (D)
There seems to be riff froming in the GOP between Rebublican Govenors and Legislators. Seems the Govenors are saying that they are the proven leaders. That the GOP Governors have to lead and do the day to day job of Running thier State's government, while GOP legislators just talk.
Do you believe a GOP govenor is a better choice for President than a Republican Congressional legislator?
I happen to be one of those who think a governor, regardless is better, but that doesn't mean I would not support someone in congress.
It occurred to me that America has not elected a Republican that was a US Senator in the era since WW2.
F. D. Roosevelt ( D)
H. S. Truman ( D)
D.D. Eisenhower (R) Supreme Commander Allied Forces EU
J.F. Kennedy ( D)
L.B. Johnson ( D)
R.M. Nixon ( R) V.P. Eisenhower administration, US HoR, US Sen
G. R. Ford ( R) V.P. Nixon Appointed
J.E. Carter ( D)
R. Reagan ( R) Gov. California
G.H.W. Bush ( R) V.P. Reagan, US Congress
W. J. Clinton ( D)
G.W. Bush ( R) Gov. Texas
B. H. Obama (D)
There seems to be riff froming in the GOP between Rebublican Govenors and Legislators. Seems the Govenors are saying that they are the proven leaders. That the GOP Governors have to lead and do the day to day job of Running thier State's government, while GOP legislators just talk.
Do you believe a GOP govenor is a better choice for President than a Republican Congressional legislator?
Yes. Republican Governors have to balance state budgets and have to deal with state Democrats to get anything accomplished. They develop negotiation skills that Congressmen don't always need.
It must be noted that list includes some Presidents who were never Governors. Nixon ran for the office in California and was defeated, and G.H.W. Bush never ran, nor was he ever a Bush and Kennedy won meritorious medals while in service, and of the group, most served in the Navy.
The Navy has had an long tradition of making Presidents. Two 20th century Presidents served as Sec. of the Navy early in their political careers.
Navy vets and other positions in the list:
Kennedy
Ford
Nixon
Bush
Bush
Carter
earlier:
Teddy Roosevelt
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Both served in the Dept. of the Navy. Teddy was Secretary of the Navy, and FDR was Assistant Secretary later on.
As a result, both enlarged and/or modernized the Navy when they were Presidents.
I don't see much merit to the notion that Governors are better than Senators at wielding the power of the Presidency.
GHW Bush and Nixon managed to implement their Presidential agendas effectively. Whether or not they were good agendas is irrelevant to this question - they were effective executives. Going back a little further, LBJ, Kennedy and Truman (Senators all, Governors none) were all very effective executives; again, the issue is not whether or not you happen to like their agendas, but whether or not the fact that they were not executives prior to being President left them unable to effectively wield the power of the Presidency. They were, and it did not.
And another thing - Vice Presidents, with the possible exception of Dick Cheney, have no meaningful leadership roles - so the notion that Truman (who, at any rate, was Vice President for less than three months) and LBJ and Nixon and GHW Bush received any meaningful executive experience for campaigning and casting the occasional tie-breaking vote (and, in Bush's case, racking up the frequent-flier miles attending the funerals of dead Soviet leaders) as Vice President, is simply silly.
The touting of Governors as the best Presidents usually comes from the right - and I'm guessing virtually all of those people would support Ted Cruz or Rand Paul (Senators) over Mitt Romney or Jon Huntsman (Governors) in 2016 in a heartbeat. In other words, even they don't really think it is all that important (except as an occasionally talking point).
I don't see much merit to the notion that Governors are better than Senators at wielding the power of the Presidency.
GHW Bush and Nixon managed to implement their Presidential agendas effectively. Whether or not they were good agendas is irrelevant to this question - they were effective executives. Going back a little further, LBJ, Kennedy and Truman (Senators all, Governors none) were all very effective executives; again, the issue is not whether or not you happen to like their agendas, but whether or not the fact that they were not executives prior to being President left them unable to effectively wield the power of the Presidency. They were, and it did not.
And another thing - Vice Presidents, with the possible exception of Dick Cheney, have no meaningful leadership roles - so the notion that Truman (who, at any rate, was Vice President for less than three months) and LBJ and Nixon and GHW Bush received any meaningful executive experience for campaigning and casting the occasional tie-breaking vote (and, in Bush's case, racking up the frequent-flier miles attending the funerals of dead Soviet leaders) as Vice President, is simply silly.
The touting of Governors as the best Presidents usually comes from the right - and I'm guessing virtually all of those people would support Ted Cruz or Rand Paul (Senators) over Mitt Romney or Jon Huntsman (Governors) in 2016 in a heartbeat. In other words, even they don't really think it is all that important (except as an occasionally talking point).
I think the important thing to remember, it helps if the person running for President has some executive experience and that comes from being governor. I don't think anyone thinks only a governor has that experience, but it does help.
I think the important thing to remember, it helps if the person running for President has some executive experience and that comes from being governor. I don't think anyone thinks only a governor has that experience, but it does help.
No, the important thing to understand is that there is no suggestion from the historical record - you know, the actual evidence - that Governors make better Presidents than Senators.
There have been numerous Senators-turned-Presidents who were very effective at negotiating the Presidency and enacting their agenda (and numerous failures, too). LBJ, for example, was a master, and part of that mastery was his ability to deal with a Congress that he knew so well from his many years there. As I also pointed out, GHW Bush (A Congressman, not a Senator, but the point holds), Nixon, JFK and Truman were also objectively effective executives (regardless of whether or not you or I liked specifically what they were effective at doing). Similarly, there have been Governors-turned-President who weren't particularly effective executives. GW Bush and Clinton were, at best, average at implementing their agendas, while Carter was generally a poor manager of the executive branch.
Way too many people love to glom onto these little pet theories of theirs, without taking time to see whether or not the laboratory called the real world actually supports what they insist is so.
Yes. Republican Governors have to balance state budgets and have to deal with state Democrats to get anything accomplished. They develop negotiation skills that Congressmen don't always need.
It must be noted that list includes some Presidents who were never Governors. Nixon ran for the office in California and was defeated, and G.H.W. Bush never ran, nor was he ever a Bush and Kennedy won meritorious medals while in service, and of the group, most served in the Navy.
The Navy has had an long tradition of making Presidents. Two 20th century Presidents served as Sec. of the Navy early in their political careers.
Navy vets and other positions in the list:
Kennedy
Ford
Nixon
Bush Bush
Carter
earlier:
Teddy Roosevelt
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Both served in the Dept. of the Navy. Teddy was Secretary of the Navy, and FDR was Assistant Secretary later on.
As a result, both enlarged and/or modernized the Navy when they were Presidents.
I see Bush listed twice. Is that in error?
I believe Bush II was Texas Air National Guard.
No, the important thing to understand is that there is no suggestion from the historical record - you know, the actual evidence - that Governors make better Presidents than Senators.
There have been numerous Senators-turned-Presidents who were very effective at negotiating the Presidency and enacting their agenda (and numerous failures, too). LBJ, for example, was a master, and part of that mastery was his ability to deal with a Congress that he knew so well from his many years there. As I also pointed out, GHW Bush (A Congressman, not a Senator, but the point holds), Nixon, JFK and Truman were also objectively effective executives (regardless of whether or not you or I liked specifically what they were effective at doing). Similarly, there have been Governors-turned-President who weren't particularly effective executives. GW Bush and Clinton were, at best, average at implementing their agendas, while Carter was generally a poor manager of the executive branch.
Way too many people love to glom onto these little pet theories of theirs, without taking time to see whether or not the laboratory called the real world actually supports what they insist is so.
And I will continue to feel a governor with executive experience is better prepared to lead the country. All you have to do is look at what we have now...Did I say, this should be a requirement? Of course not, but it does help. How many companies take someone in mid management and promote them to Pres or VP without a lot of experience managing others? Not many!!!!
I see Bush listed twice. Is that in error?
I believe Bush II was Texas Air National Guard.
Right you are. I thought he was in the Naval Reserve.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
