Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016?

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Andalublue said:

Silly question.

People rarely move between jobs at the same level of seniority or responsibility. People move up, and are selected to do so on the basis of how they have performed in lesser, but comparable tasks. So, what kind of prior experience might be relevant for an aspiring POTUS? Governor of a state? Cabinet minister? VPOTUS? Mayor of a major city? I'd argue that any of those things would provide a better grounding in the job than spending just 3 years in the Senate, and 7 in the state senate. Can you think of another president with less relevant experience?

Click to expand...

I believe I would prefer a person who had experience in law or one that was or had been a constitutional scholar as a candidate.

I am thinking that's why with Obama's lack of experience in politics was elected, people viewed him as a constitutional scholar-teacher of constitutional law.

I might like to see a law professor as president.

Zyphlin said:

So if you wre hiring a Senior Programer for your software company, the only people with "experience" would be other "senior programers". Someone who was just a "Programer" would have as much "experience" as a fry cook at McDonalds to you, because both didn't have past "experience" specfically being a "Senior Programer"?

If you were looking for an Executive Chef, a person who was previously a Sous-Chef would have as much "experience" in your eyes as a bus driver?

If you were looknig for a CEO of Fortune 500 company, the COO of another fortune 500 company would have as much "experience" as the manager at the local Staples?

From a political science stand point, it's long been established that the President of the United States serves as two primary job roles...

Chief Executive of the Federal Government and Commander-in-Chief of the United States Military. As such, when speaking of experience, it are those two aspects of the job that it most commonly relates.

When speaking about DIRECT experience for those two jobs, you're looking at two primary things:

In terms of being Chief Executive of a Governmental Body, the next "tier down" same type experience is that of a Governorship. A step down from there would be a Mayoral role, with differing weight given to the complexity of the location being governed (For example, a governor of New York is likely to be looked at in experience typically closer to a Governor, where as the Mayor of Roanoke Virginia would likely be laughed off stage). Alongside this would be experience as the Vice President, which would slide in right above "governor" in terms of levels of experience.

In terms of being Commander-in-Chief, the next "tier down" same type experience is that of a Generalship. From there you take additional steps down through the various ranks of the military. We've seen in our countries history times where the experience lending itself to CIC has been more important to the voting population than that of the Chief Executive. However, of the two, CIC experience is generally more rare when it comes to the primary experience for the job.

Click to expand...

And, I might add, in response to the Moderator's post so I'm not wasting time and space here....
I believe that just because a person is a CEO, a COO of a corporation, or a millionaire, billionaire that's run a corp. or business in the past does not mean they are or have the qualifications or experience to become president (Romney). The last thing America needs is an elitist who has made millions off of the backs and misgivings of other people or hostile company take overs. That's not an admirable quality in my mind.

I'd really like to see a centrist run for POTUS, one that has superb negotiating skills, and not necessarily a business minded person, a centrist, if you will.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Paxaeon said:

This is the year where a third party needs to be heard from.

Click to expand...

Needs to be, but it probably won't. The establishment does not like fresh ideas, only stale ones recycled as "new."

Despite my cynicism on the election cycle, I will be voting third party for the fourth year in a row.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Dittohead not! said:

Fiscal responsibility stems from an understanding that government needs to be limited and should not be spending money it does not have on things that do not benefit the republic.

Click to expand...

You're SO CLOSE to being right here that it almost pains me to point out where you're wrong. Your mistake, and the mistake of a great deal of people when it comes to Federal Spending is to misread Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. All too many people see "General Welfare and Common Defense" and fail to understand that the 18 specific items listed below it are the definition of what "General Welfare and Common Defense" means. Therefore, regardless of the "benefit of the republic", if it isn't in that list is it not a legitimate expenditure. Therefore all Energy, Education, Social Welfare, Health Care, Disaster Relief, Foreign Aid, and many, many other things this nation spends insane amounts of money on are not legitimate expenditures.

Dittohead not! said:

It has nothing to do with the "social conservative" agenda of the government deciding when and whether a woman must carry a fetus to term, who may or may not marry, and what is and isn't legal for adults to ingest. Limited government means individual liberty and responsibility.

Click to expand...

It has everything to do with the Social Conservative agenda of "Don't make me pay to support a worthless waste of flesh and oxygen. Don't make me pay to educate kids I don't have. Don't make me pay to heal morons who don't deserve to live in the first place. Etc....."

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

I don't know what that candidate would be called, other than a hypocritical moron, since true Fiscal Responsibilty STEMS FROM Social Conservatism

Click to expand...

Nonsense. Outside of your American bubble, there is no relationship between social conservatism and fiscal conservatism. In Europe, social conservatives support economic intervensionism to serve moral or cultural aims. The idea of protecting tradition often clashes fundamentally with policies related to fiscal conservatism like free trade, globalization and greater integration between economies worldwide. Limited government allows the economy to be organized on individualist lines. Don't you think that the limits of government should be applied not only to the economic realm but also the social realm? You're, quite simply, inconsistent in your views, Sir.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

Paul is much more a Centrist than a Conservative. In reality, like all Centrists he's really a Liberal at heart (hence the LIBERALtarian Party name).

Click to expand...

You must get really confused then by this Ronald Reagan quote: "If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."

Not that I agree with what he said, but it demonstrates just how grey the political world is. Many conservative ideals are, in fact, liberal ideals!

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Konig said:

Nonsense. Outside of your American bubble, there is no relationship between social conservatism and fiscal conservatism. In Europe, social conservatives support economic intervensionism to serve moral or cultural aims. The idea of protecting tradition often clashes fundamentally with policies related to fiscal conservatism like free trade, globalization and greater integration between economies worldwide. Limited government allows the economy to be organized on individualist lines. Don't you think that the limits of government should be applied not only to the economic realm but also the social realm? You're, quite simply, inconsistent in your views, Sir.

Click to expand...

The "American Bubble" is the only place left in this world where ANY form of True Conservatism still exists, Konig. Conservatism hasn't existed in Europe for centuries at this point. Isolationism, not free trade is a Traditional and Conservative fiscal policy. Yes, the limits of Government need to apply to both fiscal and social realms. In the fiscal realm, Govermnent limitations exist to keep the citizenry from being over-taxed and the Government from spending on improper things. In the social realm, Government limitations exist to ensure that the Government is keeping the social/cultural order and that they are not allowing immorality or impropriety to flourish in the nation.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Geoist said:

You must get really confused then by this Ronald Reagan quote: "If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."

Not that I agree with what he said, but it demonstrates just how grey the political world is. Many conservative ideals are, in fact, liberal ideals!

Click to expand...

Reagan was no more a Conservative than Josef Stalin. The last POTUS we've had who even came CLOSE to being a Conservative was Andrew Jackson.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

Reagan was no more a Conservative than Josef Stalin. The last POTUS we've had who even came CLOSE to being a Conservative was Andrew Jackson.

Click to expand...

Obviously, conservatism to you is different to the vast majority of people. Conservatism isn't some physical entity we can point out. It is an incredibly subjective term, especially after centuries of 'conservative/liberal ideas' forming and reforming.

For example, there was a time when being a free market supporter was considered a liberal position.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Geoist said:

Obviously, conservatism to you is different to the vast majority of people. Conservatism isn't some physical entity we can point out. It is an incredibly subjective term, especially after centuries of 'conservative/liberal ideas' forming and reforming.

Click to expand...

The vast majority of people don't want to think about waht Conservatism truly is, because it is neither easy nor fun to live under the rule of. It expects people to do what SHOULD be done, not necessarily what they WANT to do.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

The "American Bubble" is the only place left in this world where ANY form of True Conservatism still exists, Konig. Conservatism hasn't existed in Europe for centuries at this point.

Click to expand...

Who gets to label what is "true" conservatism? America has a unique brand of it, sure; a brand, however, that looks extensively authoritarian. Europe has fostered the most influential conservatives, from Burke through to Bismarck. The U.S. was a radical project: its founders were radicals, I need not remind you that. The founders were a radical challenge to the Ancien Régime conservatism that dominated Europe at the time. It is obvious, therefore, that conservatives in Europe and the U.S. will drastically differ in the brands of conservatism that they espouse. They share one thing in common that is crucial: the idea that the government needs to institute and uphold some form of morality that regulates behaviour and thought. This is what defines conservatism: the need to conserve traditional social institutions.

Isolationism, not free trade is a Traditional and Conservative fiscal policy.

Click to expand...

So you espouse protectionism? No global trade whatsoever? How can you ignore the impressive and unprecedented rise of living standards that were experienced due to such practice? How can you deny a man the ability to market his product internationally; the opportunity to learn skills from other countries and cultures? How can you deny American consumers the chance to get the best product at the best price -- in the name of conserving some mystical ideal that is apparently an encroachment on fundamental liberties?

Yes, the limits of Government need to apply to both fiscal and social realms. In the fiscal realm, Govermnent limitations exist to keep the citizenry from being over-taxed and the Government from spending on improper things. In the social realm, Government limitations exist to ensure that the Government is keeping the social/cultural order and that they are not allowing immorality or impropriety to flourish in the nation.

Click to expand...

This quote here by you is an invitation for totalitarianism. I, for one, trust man to make the correct decisions for his life on his own and those that don't should not have to conform, so long as they do not violate the rights of others. What's morally wrong with this principle that seems to puzzle conservatives, whether they're isolationists of the American tradition, monarchists, or neoconservatives that plague political discourse today?

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Konig said:

Who gets to label what is "true" conservatism? America has a unique brand of it, sure; a brand, however, that looks extensively authoritarian. Europe has fostered the most influential conservatives, from Burke through to Bismarck. The U.S. was a radical project: its founders were radicals, I need not remind you that. The founders were a radical challenge to the Ancien Régime conservatism that dominated Europe at the time. It is obvious, therefore, that conservatives in Europe and the U.S. will drastically differ in the brands of conservatism that they espouse. They share one thing in common that is crucial: the idea that the government needs to institute and uphold some form of morality that regulates behaviour and thought. This is what defines conservatism: the need to conserve traditional social institutions.

Click to expand...

"Conservatives" in the US and Europe differ dramatically on pretty much every level. That's why I said there are no True Conservatives outside of the United States.

Konig said:

So you espouse protectionism? No global trade whatsoever? How can you ignore the impressive and unprecedented rise of living standards that were experienced due to such practice? How can you deny a man the ability to market his product internationally; the opportunity to learn skills from other countries and cultures? How can you deny American consumers the chance to get the best product at the best price -- in the name of conserving some mystical ideal that is apparently an encroachment on fundamental liberties?

Click to expand...

I espouse total Isolationism. Social, Economic, Military, etc.... I have no problem going back even as far as the living standards of the 12th Century if necessary. Liberty and Freedom are not fundamental. LAW and ORDER are the fundamental ideals of society.

Konig said:

This quote here by you is an invitation for totalitarianism. I, for one, trust man to make the correct decisions for his life on his own and those that don't should not have to conform, so long as they do not violate the rights of others. What's morally wrong with this principle that seems to puzzle conservatives, whether they're isolationists of the American tradition, monarchists, or neoconservatives that plague political discourse today?

Click to expand...

I for one have total trust in NOBODY. The number that I trust to some degree or another could be counted on the fingers of both my hands while leaving sufficient excess digits to flip the rest of you off with both hands. What you miss is that while my Moral life does not adversely affect the Immoral lives of so many around me; their Immoral lives all too often adversely affect my life. That is what makes their "choices" inappropriate to condone.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

Liberty and Freedom are not fundamental. LAW and ORDER are the fundamental ideals of society.

Click to expand...

This quote neatly summarises our differences of outlook. I am personally quite conservative; however I afford others the choice to live their life as they wish. The striking problem with this maxim of yours is that many authoritarians, despots and tyrants project themselves as the safekeepers of order in society. And we all know how that ends.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Konig said:

This quote neatly summarises our differences of outlook. I am personally quite conservative; however I afford others the choice to live their life as they wish. The striking problem with this maxim of yours is that many authoritarians, despots and tyrants project themselves as the safekeepers of order in society. And we all know how that ends.

Click to expand...

Whereas the striking problem with your view of things is that many who speak of Freedom and Liberty are simply seeking the means to avoid the most basic tenants of Society, Social Order and Morality. Life has never been and hopefully never will be about what we WANT to do. It is instead, and always has been about what we SHOULD do.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

Whereas the striking problem with your view of things is that many who speak of Freedom and Liberty are simply seeking the means to avoid the most basic tenants of Society, Social Order and Morality. Life has never been and hopefully never will be about what we WANT to do. It is instead, and always has been about what we SHOULD do.

Click to expand...

Free people should do what they want to do, they ought to, so long as they do not violate the rights of others. People like you, for whom said actions are none of your business because what happens behind closed doors with no victims doesn't effect you, ought to mind your own business.

Don't tread on me

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Lachean said:

Free people should do what they want to do, they ought to, so long as they do not violate the rights of others. People like you, for whom said actions are none of your business because what happens behind closed doors with no victims doesn't effect you, ought to mind your own business.

Don't tread on me

Click to expand...

That's wonderful except that all too often your "Freedom" isn't kept behind closed doors or inside private businesses. All too often it's brought out fully into the open and public spaces, where I do have to deal with it, and the violent nausea that much of it causes me on a daily basis.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

That's wonderful except that all too often your "Freedom" isn't kept behind closed doors or inside private businesses. All too often it's brought out fully into the open and public spaces

Click to expand...

For example?

Tigger said:

where I do have to deal with it, and the violent nausea that much of it causes me on a daily basis.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry that freedom makes you sick, but merely seeing something doesn't mean you're "dealing with it" nor does it mean its harming you, effecting you in any way or violating your rights.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

AJiveMan said:

I believe that just because a person is a CEO, a COO of a corporation, or a millionaire, billionaire that's run a corp. or business in the past does not mean they are or have the qualifications or experience to become president (Romney).

Click to expand...

Well first, note that I specifically suggested that experience as a CEO or COO would not, imho, be direct experience but indirect to the specific job of the POTUS.

Second, the sincerity of your argument somewhat comes into question based on the seeming underlining message based on your words. Your inclusion of millionaire and billionaire (not jobs) mixed in with actual job titles, and your inclusion of Romney as an example of someone whose experience is this is question. It ignores that Romney had what most experts suggest is the closest directly relevant experience to POTUS...being the Chief Executive of a Governmental Entity on the state level, IE Governor.

Third, I can't help but notice you avoided completely answering the question as to whether or not this seeming standard you are suggesting applies to all jobs, or if you simply have this strange mentality when it comes to the President and the President alone.

Fourth, there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between talking about qualities or experiences you prefer in a Presidential candidate and qualities and experiences that directly relate as "Experience" to the speciifc job duties of a Presidency.

I may PREFER that a President has some experience in a private sector company, specifically a small business. However, simply because I'd PREFER they have that experience doesn't mean I'm arrogant enough to believe my preference directly means that's the most applicable experience to being a President. I may PREFER that a President be a historical scholar with a deep understanding of the views and ideas of the Founders. But I'm not going to sit here and try to suggest a Historical Scholar has the better resume of experience speficially related to the task of being President than a Govenor. That doesn't mean I don't think the Historian may not make a better president...experience alone doesn't determine that...but it does mean I'm not egotistical enough to think that simply because I prefer something that magically means it has direct experience.

Being the Chief Executive of a State Government is directly related experience to the specific duties of being a Chief Executive of the Federal Government.

Being a Constitutional Laywer may relate to certain aspects of a POTUS's job, but it's not direct experience relating specifically to the day to day duties, responsabilities, and expectations of the job.

It's perfectly reasonable, in theory, to not like someone with a ton of corporate experience to be President (Just like it's perfectly reasonable, in theory, to not like someone whose never or rarely worked in a traditional private sector job to be POTUS). It's even perfectly reasonable to suggest that such a factor outweighs actual job related experience the person has. But it's just not a logical argument to suggest that the only direct type of experience for POTUS is being POTUS, and every other form of experience is somehow on equal footing.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Lachean said:

For example?

Click to expand...

For example Gay and Lesbian couples engaged in PDA's in public places. My fiance and I (a heterosexual couple) don't even do that. It's not appropriate, especially in same-sex couples. Having to deal with female police officers, EMT's or other public officers. Those are not appropriate roles for women to be undertaking.

Lachean said:

I'm sorry that freedom makes you sick, but merely seeing something doesn't mean you're "dealing with it" nor does it mean its harming you, effecting you in any way or violating your rights.

Click to expand...

Freedom is wonderful in principle, just like Communism is. Unfortunately in both cases once you add the human element, it becomes corrupted. Unfortunately it's not just the private sector that has been invaded by these disgusting instances of impropriety and just plain immorality. Tomorrow morning I will have to go to Town Hall and deal with one of two Town Clerks, both of whom are female. Why?, you ask.... Because the town requires that we license our dog on a yearly basis and the online renewal system is out of service at this time.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

That's wonderful except that all too often your "Freedom" isn't kept behind closed doors or inside private businesses. All too often it's brought out fully into the open and public spaces, where I do have to deal with it, and the violent nausea that much of it causes me on a daily basis.

Click to expand...

"violent nausea"

hahaha

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

For example Gay and Lesbian couples engaged in PDA's in public places. My fiance and I (a heterosexual couple) don't even do that. It's not appropriate, especially in same-sex couples. Having to deal with female police officers, EMT's or other public officers. Those are not appropriate roles for women to be undertaking.

Freedom is wonderful in principle, just like Communism is. Unfortunately in both cases once you add the human element, it becomes corrupted. Unfortunately it's not just the private sector that has been invaded by these disgusting instances of impropriety and just plain immorality. Tomorrow morning I will have to go to Town Hall and deal with one of two Town Clerks, both of whom are female. Why?, you ask.... Because the town requires that we license our dog on a yearly basis and the online renewal system is out of service at this time.

Click to expand...

So your complaints about violent nausea inducing acts of freedom amount to gay rights and women's rights? Wow...

How does two men holding hands or sneaking in a quick peck effect you? Have you tried not staring at gay couples? Change the channel if you don't like the tune.

I'll take a free society where I might see/hear something that grosses me out over an authoritarian one where such acts are criminalized and people are imprisoned for harmless acts of love.

"l really dig what they do with homosexuals in this country. They put 'em in prison with a lot of other men. That's really good punishment." - Lenny Bruce

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Lachean said:

So your complaints about violent nausea inducing acts of freedom amount to gay rights and women's rights? Wow...

Click to expand...

In public places, those were two easy examples. There are a ton of private businesses that I avoid like the plague for any number of reasons including (but not limited to)... the gender and sexual preferences of their employees/owners, their lack of security, the company's whose products they sell, etc....

Lachean said:

How does two men holding hands or sneaking in a quick peck effect you? Have you tried not staring at gay couples? Change the channel if you don't like the tune.

Click to expand...

As someone who believes in personal self-defense, simply not paying attention to everyone and everything around me is not an option. That's why I don't go out as much as many other people do. I can't both maintain situational awareness and keep my stomach from tying itself in knots.

Lachean said:

I'll take a free society where I might see/hear something that grosses me out over an authoritarian one where such acts are criminalized and people are imprisoned for harmless acts of love.

"l really dig what they do with homosexuals in this country. They put 'em in prison with a lot of other men. That's really good punishment." - Lenny Bruce

Click to expand...

No, not prison. The morgue. Much more effective that way.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

The vast majority of people don't want to think about waht Conservatism truly is, because it is neither easy nor fun to live under the rule of. It expects people to do what SHOULD be done, not necessarily what they WANT to do.

Click to expand...

More broad and subjective rhetoric.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

That's wonderful except that all too often your "Freedom" isn't kept behind closed doors or inside private businesses. All too often it's brought out fully into the open and public spaces, where I do have to deal with it, and the violent nausea that much of it causes me on a daily basis.

Click to expand...

Well, get over it.

As for me and every other freedomlover, I'd rather deal with your nausea of two men kissing than the oppressive hand of a State that wishes to force its ideals upon the rest of us.

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Tigger said:

For example Gay and Lesbian couples engaged in PDA's in public places. My fiance and I (a heterosexual couple) don't even do that. It's not appropriate, especially in same-sex couples. Having to deal with female police officers, EMT's or other public officers. Those are not appropriate roles for women to be undertaking.

Click to expand...

This isn't surprising to hear from you i.e: total bigotry. You and Islamic fundamentalism have quite a lot in common, actually.

As you said earlier:

Tigger said:

I espouse total Isolationism. Social, Economic, Military, etc.... I have no problem going back even as far as the living standards of the 12th Century if necessary. Liberty and Freedom are not fundamental. LAW and ORDER are the fundamental ideals of society.

Click to expand...

Re: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016

Geoist said:

Well, get over it.

As for me and every other freedomlover, I'd rather deal with your nausea of two men kissing than the oppressive hand of a State that wishes to force its ideals upon the rest of us.

Click to expand...

Sorry, "getting over it" isn't an option. Just as walking into that restaurant with the "No Weapons Allowed" sign on the front door or getting my banking done by a female teller are not options. Some of us actually have convictions and principles that we live by. I understand those things are not popular anymore, but a few of us do still believe in them.

The oppressive hand of State is only necessary because you folks refuse to follow the rules without it.