View Poll Results: Which Presidential primary race do you think will be the most interesting in 2016?

Voters
41. You may not vote on this poll
  • Democrat

    6 14.63%
  • Republican

    35 85.37%
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 104

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

  1. #51
    Paying To Play
    AJiveMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    wisconSIN
    Last Seen
    05-15-15 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,775

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Andalublue View Post
    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?
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    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.
    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.

  2. #52
    Sage
    Geoist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    9,882

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paxaeon View Post

    This is the year where a third party needs to be heard from.
    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.
    "Men did not make the earth ... it is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property... Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds." -- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice
    http://www.wealthandwant.com/

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    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.
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    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.
    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....."

  4. #54
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Sønderborg, Denmark
    Last Seen
    06-01-14 @ 10:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    136

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    I don't know what that candidate would be called, other than a hypocritical moron, since true Fiscal Responsibilty STEMS FROM Social Conservatism
    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.

  5. #55
    Sage
    Geoist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    9,882

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    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).
    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!
    "Men did not make the earth ... it is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property... Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds." -- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice
    http://www.wealthandwant.com/

  6. #56
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Konig View Post
    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.
    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.

  7. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoist View Post
    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!
    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.

  8. #58
    Sage
    Geoist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    9,882

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    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.
    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.
    "Men did not make the earth ... it is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property... Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds." -- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice
    http://www.wealthandwant.com/

  9. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoist View Post
    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.
    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.

  10. #60
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Sønderborg, Denmark
    Last Seen
    06-01-14 @ 10:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    136

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    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.
    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.
    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.
    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?
    Last edited by Konig; 03-27-14 at 01:15 PM.

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •