Los Angeles Mayor Garcetti: ‘I might be overqualified’ for presidency (ethical, thought)

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

You've just (accurately!) described about 90% or so of the entire political landscape, regardless of left/right ideologies ... local, state, nationally, internationally ...

But in some cases it is truer than others and in Los Angeles you are talking about a lot of questionable voters, obviously.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

You apparently have no knowledge/understanding of how our Electoral College system is designed. Yes, that's exactly what happened. And doesn't mean 33 states' population majorities voted for the Chump. It has nothing to do with Tuleland. I didn't make it up. And it's not hard to read the facts. Give it a go, Finper ...

It's a BS system and always has been. The Founding Fathers envisioned a safeguard system against inequitable representation ... but that's what we just got. They never had the possible foresight to see our modern landscape. Chump won as a hated and incompetent candidate by a plurality split. He is the very definition of who they were trying to safeguard against (you can read the Founding Fathers' exact definition of who they were trying to protect against ... it is an exact description of the Donald). It's a democratic disaster. And by democratic, I don't refer to the political party.

And no, I have never loved or wanted HRC for POTUS either.

and this is the reason we need the electoral college. If the election was left up to majority only, all a candidate would have to do is campaign in NYC< Chic, Los Angeles and 1/2 dozen other cities to be elected, leaving the majority of the population and leaving the small states with no representation. Our fore fathers realized what could happen as the country moved away from just the east coast.

And while we are at it, how about telling us what Trump has done that is bad for our country? I can't think of a single thing. I do not like his texting, his attitude and I certainly wasn't a strong supporter, but he has done a heck of a better job than I ever imagined he would do.

[NOLA101]

Well, compared to Trump, a piece of poop is overqualified to be President.

Garcetti would probably make a pretty good President. But I doubt he has a chance.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by nmnita

and this is the reason we need the electoral college. If the election was left up to majority only, all a candidate would have to do is campaign in NYC< Chic, Los Angeles and 1/2 dozen other cities to be elected, leaving the majority of the population and leaving the small states with no representation. Our fore fathers realized what could happen as the country moved away from just the east coast.

And while we are at it, how about telling us what Trump has done that is bad for our country? I can't think of a single thing. I do not like his texting, his attitude and I certainly wasn't a strong supporter, but he has done a heck of a better job than I ever imagined he would do.

I would say: “you must be joking ...” ... but I know you are not. SAD!

So, the EC was envisioned for basically two reasons.
1. To balance the interests of small population / rural states against high population / urban states.

2. To protect the nation from incompetent, demagogue populists and / or foreign interests manipulating the [basically ignorant] population into electing a fool, and / or otherwise deranged despotic manipulator to the nation's highest office

It is “desirable,” Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 68, “that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of” president. But is “equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station.” These “men”—the electors––would be “most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.” And because of their discernment—because they possessed wisdom that the people as a whole might not—“the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”

As Michael Signer explains, the framers were particularly afraid of the people choosing a demagogue. The electors, Hamilton believed, would prevent someone with “talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity” from becoming president. And they would combat “the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.” They would prevent America’s adversaries from meddling in its elections. The founders created the Electoral College, in other words, in part to prevent the election of someone like Donald Trump.

Now then, what did we get? What just happened?

1. Lower population / more rural states just exercised advantage over higher population / urban-centric states.

2. We got the exact textbook, founding fathers' directly quoted fear elected into office ... a fool ... and idiot ... a dangerously mentally deranged, despotically minded moron.

And so: How is #1 above any more equitablly balancing than the reverse?
Ans: it's not ... it's even less equitable.

And so: how did the EC fail to guard against populist idiocy and foreign interests influencing the election?
Ans: because it functions as a partisan mechanism ... rather than an independently intelligent body, as intended.

The Electoral College has been a complete failure.



As to what has Chump “done that is bad for our country”?
Sweet jesus! Every single pen stroke and word from his mouth and twitch from his twitter fingers have been a complete disaster. Total moronic destruction.

[RMESMH]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

1. What President have I ever said I liked?

Bullseye. Have to give you that one .

[Haakon]

Originally Posted by jm1982

I needed a good laugh, and Eric never fails to disappoint when he opens his mouth and says something ridiculous.

Since he became Mayor of L.A:

Skyrocketing Homelessness
Big rise in violent crime
Ghetto /3rd world conditions in too many areas thanks to sanctuary policies and lax enforcement
Etc etc

Yet he thinks he's overqualified for the job of President ?

Isn't this the same kind of smug arrogance that helped a certain female candidate lose the election in 2016?..
----
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, who is eyeing a run for the presidency, mused Wednesday that President Donald Trump has shown the standards for holding the highest office in the land aren’t all that high. "Judging from what’s coming from this White House, I might be overqualified,” Garcetti said when asked by NBC News about his own presidential aspirations.





https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...idency-n840766

All of that would over qualify him to be a Democrat president, all of that is what would happen after he's elected and he's already got a head start in one of the largest US cities.

[Haakon]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

2. We got the exact textbook, founding fathers' directly quoted fear elected into office ... a fool ... and idiot ... a dangerously mentally deranged, despotically minded moron.

You think the founding fathers would have approved more of Hillary? A corrupt, career, power hungry politician who sells out America? People like her is exactly what the founding fathers were trying to get away from, so yes the EC worked as it was supposed to.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Haakon

You think the founding fathers would have approved more of Hillary? A corrupt, career, power hungry politician who sells out America? People like her is exactly what the founding fathers were trying to get away from, so yes the EC worked as it was supposed to.

I suspect the Founders would find HRC as unpleasant as I do ... which is considerably. However, your indictments fall seriously short of your conclusion that Chump would be the Founders' choice.

You condemn HRC on three points:
1. Corrupt
2. Career politician
3. Power hungry personality

Let's dispense with #'s 2 and 3 easily first:
#2. However much you (and I) might find career politicians distasteful people frequently, being a career politician is not a disqualifyer in the slightest. In fact, a career politician is far more likely to be skillful and efficient in evaluating and creating policy, and in understanding and executing the nuances of policies of every kind in governance - than a non-politician. Career political experience also provides the most opportunity for operating within the protocols and laws of governance.

#3. However much power hungry personalities legitimately raise a warning flag, how these personalities actually govern is the test. And in our Founders' wisdom, there are three branches of governing power ... each a check and balance against the others.

So your protest fails entirely on both these counts - regardless of to whom you apply the labels. And, in the case of HRC, for all she is a disfavorable personality, she is also a proven skillful politician and statesman. She is smart as a whip. Deeply experienced. Deeply connected. Highly educated in general and specifically in law and governance. She is consumately qualified to be president. You, and I, just don't like her personaliy, her platform ideologies, her disingenuousness ... and similar. None of that makes her incompetent to govern.

Now, as to #1 ... prove your accusation of corruption. Don't regurgitate accusations. Show us proof of her corruption.

So no, the EC did NOT function as intended. It allowed partisan electors to put an entirely inexperienced, cleary 100% incompetent, deranged moron in the White House. Virtually every member of the house and senate, as well as his entire cabinet, know he is incompetent. He is referred to as a moron by numerous of his own party and advisers. He is precisely the definition of who the Founders created the EC to protect against.

[PilgrimsProgress]

He can weave welcome baskets for the homeless and newly released felons.

[gmagoo]

Originally Posted by nmnita

and this is the reason we need the electoral college. If the election was left up to majority only, all a candidate would have to do is campaign in NYC< Chic, Los Angeles and 1/2 dozen other cities to be elected, leaving the majority of the population and leaving the small states with no representation. Our fore fathers realized what could happen as the country moved away from just the east coast.

And while we are at it, how about telling us what Trump has done that is bad for our country? I can't think of a single thing. I do not like his texting, his attitude and I certainly wasn't a strong supporter, but he has done a heck of a better job than I ever imagined he would do.

Why do we need the EC and other countries don`t? They have rural areas everywhere else but they don`t give representation to prairie dogs, snakes and trees.