View Poll Results: Should US Presidential Candidates Be Tested?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    3 10.71%
  • No

    25 89.29%
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 76

Thread: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

  1. #31
    Sage
    Lovebug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,885

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Do voters actually care? Not sure if promises and fine speeches are more important than qualifications.
    These(real or not) come to mind when I think of the average voter.
    The Best Of Jaywalking - Final Jay Leno Tonight Show | Daily Video Blog - Videolicious.tv

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    If someone slips through the crack as you say, it is first because the majority of those belonging to his political party wanted him to slip through the crack. They nominated him. Then in the general it is the majority of Americans who decided for what ever reason experience and knowledge of the issues wasn't needed. But the key word here is majority. No system is flawless.
    No system is flawless, but we should require more than just being born in the US and being over the age of 35. That's way too low for such and important position.

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Then there is the problem of deciding what questions would be on the test, also who determines what answers are right or wrong. political point of view may decide the right or wrong aspect.
    I fail to see why that is a problem. As I stated in another response, a candidate should be able to expound at length on something like Marbury vs Madison. That's just basic stuff that anyone who is President should know. You ask some things that have concrete objective answers. Then you ask some things that are more abstract where there might be different points of view. In that case a successful answer should demonstrate sound reasoning, rather than adherence to a certain point of view.

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    The two major parties have monopoly on our political system and thus in having that monopoly they limit the choices of candidates. But in the end who is elected always boils down to the people, even if the people are forced to choice from a very shallow pool of candidates.
    I am tired of choosing from a shallow pool of candidates.

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    No, that's our job as voters. If we're too unconcerned to educate ourselves, then we deserve what we get.

    Ideas like testing and term limits is just an attempt to protect us from ourselves so we can sink even further into ignorance and apathy.
    As I said before, in an ideal world, voters would be tested as well. However, the problem is that would be use to unjustly disenfranchise people. However, we can and should expect more from a person who is going to be President, that we would from ordinary citizens.

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    The other problem is establishing correct answers. We don't often phrase it as such, but really most issues we have with politicians are over individual ideology, not knowledge.
    I disagree. Again, anyone who is going to be in office should know the Marbury vs Madison established judicial review and they should be able to talk at length on the significance of that. You can ask questions that may get an ideological response where you are just looking for sound reasoning. For example although I like Angela Davis very much, I disagree with her on some major issues. However, I am always impressed with her reasoning ability even when I don't agree. That's the type of thing I am talking about.

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    GWB and Obama both graduated from Harvard...

    Take your pick political fanboys but the point is, tests are pointless.

    Edit: And George Washington and Abraham Lincoln didn't... test are now double pointless.
    George W Bush went to Yale where he got by because he was the son of a rich man. He is a good reason why we should have tests.

  6. #36
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    George W Bush went to Yale where he got by because he was the son of a rich man. He is a good reason why we should have tests.
    You do realize that there are a lot of rich and powerful people who go to these colleges and DO fail, right? I get it, you have a blind hatred for Bush and to you he was probably the Anti-Christ.

    In a roundabout way though, you just proved my point. What's to stop someone who was the son of a rich man from passing your test the same way I assume you think Bush did.

  7. #37
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,959
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    No system is flawless, but we should require more than just being born in the US and being over the age of 35. That's way too low for such and important position.



    I fail to see why that is a problem. As I stated in another response, a candidate should be able to expound at length on something like Marbury vs Madison. That's just basic stuff that anyone who is President should know. You ask some things that have concrete objective answers. Then you ask some things that are more abstract where there might be different points of view. In that case a successful answer should demonstrate sound reasoning, rather than adherence to a certain point of view.



    I am tired of choosing from a shallow pool of candidates.
    I agree on the shallow pool, that is why I have voted for third party candidates in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections. I will not vote for the lesser of two evils or the least worst candidate just because they happened to be a Republican or Democrat. Even if the least worst candidate wins, you still end up with a dud in the White House.

    But even if all the candidates could expound on Marbury vs. Madison or anything else one could think of, that does mean he will know how to react to ISIS or the Ukraine situation. It doesn't mean he will know what to do to turn the economy around or to hand our illegal immigration problem. More important it doesn't mean that a president will be willing to go against his party's base or the will of the American People to keep this country safe if need be or to do what is right when the popular will is against it.

    I suppose what is really needed is for our elected officials to put the country and her people ahead of their political party. If they did this, there would be no test needed.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  8. #38
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,357

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    George W Bush went to Yale where he got by because he was the son of a rich man. He is a good reason why we should have tests.
    And Barack Obama went to Harvard (I also thought Bush went to Harvard) where he got by by being a product of quotas. What's your point?

  9. #39
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,357

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    I disagree. Again, anyone who is going to be in office should know the Marbury vs Madison established judicial review and they should be able to talk at length on the significance of that. You can ask questions that may get an ideological response where you are just looking for sound reasoning. For example although I like Angela Davis very much, I disagree with her on some major issues. However, I am always impressed with her reasoning ability even when I don't agree. That's the type of thing I am talking about.
    You seem to be hung up on Mabury, but while the decision is important, when I vote it is not in my top ten issues. I am interested in more current issues like the border, the economy, the current world situation. Stuff that matters to me and now. How are you going to test the issues important to me?

    Another small point. We cannot come up with a way to test for the two Constitutional requirements. Age and citizenship. Why would your new requirements be any different?

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    You do realize that there are a lot of rich and powerful people who go to these colleges and DO fail, right?
    Yep, I realize that. I also realize that there are a lot that get by because they are rich.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    I get it, you have a blind hatred for Bush and to you he was probably the Anti-Christ.
    No I don't hate him. I just think he did not have the depth to be President of the US.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    In a roundabout way though, you just proved my point. What's to stop someone who was the son of a rich man from passing your test the same way I assume you think Bush did.
    There's nothing to stop a rich person from passing. If they pass, then they pass.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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
  •