U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-22-2009, 09:18 AM
 
1,047 posts, read 2,045,866 times
Reputation: 412

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by andreaspercheron View Post
Sometimes I think we'd be better off with a non-politician, someone that comes NOT preprogrammed to say, do and gesture all the same things all the rest of them do.
I think that, too, but then I remember how successful Carter and the Georgia Mafia were with dealings w/ Congress. Then I second guess myself.

I guess you need to know how to massage the system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-22-2009, 09:34 AM
 
Location: Wyoming
9,169 posts, read 16,519,971 times
Reputation: 13364
Yeah, I think it's possible. Considering some of those who have been elected to other high offices -- Arnold Schwarzenegger, Al Franken, Jesse Ventura, etc.-- I think it's just a matter of time. Obama had zilch experience in elected office before he made his bid; basically, he proved he could pull votes with his Senate election, then put out the feelers for the Big Race.

Despite what some people seem to think, U.S. Presidents are still elected by the general population. Put a national hero into the running, and if he/she can command respect and get enough people excited, the oval office awaits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2009, 12:15 PM
 
48,519 posts, read 81,048,183 times
Reputation: 17978
I disagree that at the least you need experience being a executive;the common man would be overwhelmed. But we have had people from outside the politcal circles and most have not gottn any support. Most wre one thmee candidates really.Only a fool would believe that what goes on outside our country has no efect on this country. That is prehaps the biggest responsiblity of a president which is why he is commnader and chief. Those that want to hide in the sand pile are just a volding responsibilty and foolish IMO.I can't really thnik of when we avoid it except between WWI and WWII wityh the resulting disaster known as WWII.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2009, 12:18 PM
 
Location: NY
2,007 posts, read 3,362,469 times
Reputation: 905
I don't know, but if the right person shows up he or she has my vote! All current parties have no one really good right now. I'm sick of voting for the lesser of two evils.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2009, 10:37 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,574,557 times
Reputation: 35864
Quote:
Originally Posted by mississauga75 View Post
the rules of the game have changed. .

No they haven't. The rules of the game are the same as they were under Genghis Khan. Whoever has the power can crush whomever they want, and take what they want from them, killing them if necessary. Or fun.

The only thing that has changed is, who has the power.

As for the original question, the person would have to have the support of the media. The media will be lining up in a matter of weeks or months, to anoint several people with the title of "prospective presidential hopeful", and once a few of those are named, the final race is a done deal. Maybe with a few scratches of people the media turns against. The media will probably decide the final race, too, although that is a bit harder to do. Even before the 2008 election, they were revealing the identity of the '08 contenders would be back in the race in 2012.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2009, 10:52 PM
 
Location: Mississauga
1,575 posts, read 1,707,712 times
Reputation: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
No they haven't. The rules of the game are the same as they were under Genghis Khan. Whoever has the power can crush whomever they want, and take what they want from them, killing them if necessary. Or fun.

The only thing that has changed is, who has the power.


I was responding to a post by someone else. I'm not sure if you read his post and understood the context of what I said to him in response, but you quote one sentence from my response and talk about rules of engagement - I fail to draw the connection on what I said to him and what you are lecturing me on now.

He indicated to me that basically the U.S should enter into Isolationism, gather inner strength again and go back to its roots. I countered that the world is more global now, information exchange and intertwined economies as never before, might not be a good idea to put yourself in a cocoon or you'll get left behind. I'm not sure how the rules haven't changed. The world isn't Sid Meier's Civilization and through time, societies evolve socially, atleast I think in the real world.

To what you are saying, it is obvious the U.S has the power to crush whomever they want and yet they don't but they are the big player now. Why? Is it because of International pressure? An evolved society maybe! a combination of the two. What happened to Genghis Khan.

Last edited by mississauga75; 04-22-2009 at 11:07 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2009, 10:58 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
84,977 posts, read 98,832,039 times
Reputation: 31386
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxxoccupancy View Post
Even Presidents like Reagan, Eisenhower, and Clinton had to hold some kind of office, and all were known nationally before they ran. Only Carter and Bush, Jr. were relative unknowns when they ran. Ross Perot could have been president had he shown the stature, while Colin Powell could have won if he had the desire to go for it. Charles Lindberg could have been elected in 1940, due to FDR's rising unpopularity.

Even those men were known well nationwide.
Carter was governor of Georgia. He was at least as well known as Clinton. Bush was governor of Texas, and a member of a three generation political family. His grandfather was a senator from Connecticut, and his father was president of the US! These were not unknown people.

Ross Perot never said anything substantial, he was always talking about "looking under the hood" and stuff like that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2009, 05:13 AM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,322,321 times
Reputation: 2558
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
I disagree that at the least you need experience being a executive;the common man would be overwhelmed. But we have had people from outside the politcal circles and most have not gottn any support. Most wre one thmee candidates really.Only a fool would believe that what goes on outside our country has no efect on this country. That is prehaps the biggest responsiblity of a president which is why he is commnader and chief. Those that want to hide in the sand pile are just a volding responsibilty and foolish IMO.I can't really thnik of when we avoid it except between WWI and WWII wityh the resulting disaster known as WWII.
We were isolationist throughout our history until WW1. We returned to that after WW1 until WW2 & havent looked back since. Havent taken a single serious step forward since either because our focus is lost. Thinking that what goes on around us is more important than what goes on here or that outside influences should be the major driving force domestically has done nothing but dig a very big hole with us squarely on the bottom.
It is not avoiding responsability to look at ourselves first & formost, actually the oposite is true & we are paying the price for years of such irresponsability. Our president should place the country & its people before anything & everything the world throws at it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2009, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Mississauga
1,575 posts, read 1,707,712 times
Reputation: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker View Post
We were isolationist throughout our history until WW1. We returned to that after WW1 until WW2 & havent looked back since. Havent taken a single serious step forward since either because our focus is lost. Thinking that what goes on around us is more important than what goes on here or that outside influences should be the major driving force domestically has done nothing but dig a very big hole with us squarely on the bottom.
It is not avoiding responsability to look at ourselves first & formost, actually the oposite is true & we are paying the price for years of such irresponsability. Our president should place the country & its people before anything & everything the world throws at it.
I agree with your supposition militarily. Economically i'm not sure it is the best course of action and world economies are so intertwined, it may not even be possible even with the intent. I do know the sharing of technology and information in the world today is greater than ever before.

However, taking care of domestic issues isn't a bad idea as in getting your financial house in order and ensuring standard of living goes up instead of down in relative terms.

Isolationism on its own though, may be risky and regressive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2009, 07:16 PM
 
5 posts, read 12,650 times
Reputation: 15
I agree, I am a registered Rep. voter, and am very dissapointed in the way both Dem's and Rep's have been selling out our country to the UN, IPCC, and the WHO. I want a president that will have the balls to tell these people that the only ones tohat can determine what our country does for the world is the every day citizens of the U.S.
I am not saying that the UN is a bad bunch of people. they just have agenda's that are not very clear, and they do not benefit the U.S. The President need not to worry about the whole world only the U.S.A.'s world. Secure our borders protect our people from all forms of harm that may befall us. Unrestrict the individual States of America so that they may govern effectivley. Big brother should stay out of the buissness of all our public and local schools. Let teachers decide what to teach, allow the students to be informed of all possibilities so that they may make there own choice of what they will believe. Bring back the troops, and only train to defend our borders in case of invasion. Let the rest of the countries of the world fall prey to there own devices. Maintain alliances only for trade and commerce. Drill for our own oil, while perfecting alternatives. Re-instate a much simpler tax code that does not take a PhD to understand. Give the power of the people back to the people. Stop all this big brother crap that has the US citizens always looking over there shoulder for big brother in fear. The people should not fear the Government, but the Government fear the people. This would ensure the Government would only look out for the peoples interests, and not there own.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top