How would you choose a President?

[MorkandMindy]

Balance between progress and stability is good.

Congress is content with the status quo, for example the Medical Care Organizations that are making a fortune sitting in the middle creaming off 15% from the cost of medical care as they pass the bills on to the government, they are making a fortune and pay enough of the election campaigns of Congressmen and women to keep them from allowing a President of either party to fix the system. B Obama knew exactly what needed to be done but couldn't do it. D Trump also knew exactly what needed to be done but again Congress also blocked him.

That's stability and there is way too much of it. Any suggestions on how to get change through Congress if it reduces the income they are getting is of course welcome.


I'm guessing that on the really big issues Congresspeople will vote their own pocketbooks so the choice of President is very important.


(I'm feeling a bit despondent so I'd love to hear I'm wrong about Congress)

 

[MorkandMindy]

As for the choice I'm fairly convinced the middle of the political spectrum is the best place to be. I was worried in 2016 when one candidate was too far to the left, but then how much was he going to get done anyway? And the same party had another candidate way off to the right who got the nomination.

So although a Democrat at the time I had to pick the candidate who like Bernie wanted to bring jobs back to America. Again there is always the question of how much the person is actually going to be able to get done. But I'd rather have someone who said they wanted to bring the jobs back than someone who long advocated the TPP to help get rid of some more of the jobs still here.

(I'm actually an Independent leaning toward Republican, well, maybe just at the moment, because neither party actually cares about low paid white males in manual work)

 

[miamited]

Hi M&M,

Well, the first thing I would look for is someone who I could trust to be honest. Now, I realize that's a difficult thing to determine, especially in politicians, but there is surely a line that can be drawn between someone who occasionally can't tell the truth because of national security or someone who may tell the truth as they see things or want to do things that just turn out not to be so because of our political system.

A lot of politicians stand up during election days and proclaim a lot of promises of what they want to do. However, all of us need to understand that we're not a monarchy or dictator form of government. Just because someone is the president doesn't mean that they get to do all that they want to do.

I would also want someone with experience in the political arena and someone who is reasonably humble and able to work well with others. I know that many won't agree with me, but I believed President Obama to be such a leader. I also believe that most of our past presidents have been reasonably humble in their working with others. Able to sit down with others and hammer out agreements with a give and take that allows everyone to get some of what they want and when that can't be accomplished, then to remain stable and forthright about what's going on.

I absolutely don't want anyone who denigrates others and feels it necessary to bully others by making up names for them like they were some kindergarten child. I also want someone with a strong moral background. Now, I must say that I wouldn't expect all candidates to be perfect in all that they do, but for me, I'd like someone that is 'reasonably' moral.

That's my two cents worth. Thanks for asking.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[mama2one]

So although a Democrat at the time I had to pick the candidate who like Bernie wanted to bring jobs back

what jobs do you want back?

almost every person in my husband's family, my family, and several neighbors have either gone back to school or learned another job due to downsizing or seeing the writing on the wall

jobs are constantly changing and people have to learn more, go back to school, keep updated to stay in the workplace

it's people who need to adjust as jobs change
any candidate who promises jobs is out of touch with what's happening

 

[Fantine]

We need to change the selection process first:
Abolish the Electoral College.
Replace all voting machines that don't have paper ballots with electronic machines with paper ballots. Have a large sign advising voters to read through their paper ballot before depositing it into the ballot box to make sure that his/her choices were accurately tallied.
Have publicly financed campaigns (this option is possible for presidential candidates, but unless both agree to accept the public funding it becomes an uneven exercise where one is clearly outspent).
If a candidate seriously misbehaves at a debate (stalking another debater like a crazed orangatung, discussing the size of his sexual organ, etc.) (s)he should be kicked off the debate floor while the debate continues with the grownups at the podiums.

 

[Peter J Barban]

Option 1: Vote for the most conservative candidate that has a chance of winning the general election.

Option 2: Let Scott Adams decide for me.

 

[Tanj]

My method involves a dunking pond, and starts with the question: "Are you a witch?"

 

[Peter J Barban]

My method involves a dunking pond, and starts with the question: "Are you a witch?"

What is your second test?

 

[childeye 2]

I think that the current and foremost issue we need to face is that our Democracy, is more of an Autocracy. Knowing that the Supreme Court would not stand against gerrymandering, our current president had help from Russia, and many out-dated election machines are vulnerable to being hacked into, it seems naïve to consider that our elections are even legitimate.

 

[Tanj]

What is your second test?

To determine the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow.

 

[SimplyMe]

To determine the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow.

Let me guess, the third is the person that gets a sword from a lady in a lake?

 

[Tanj]

Let me guess, the third is the person that gets a sword from a lady in a lake?

Don't be ridiculous. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. You don't get to become president because some moistened bink lobbed a scimitar at you.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

Edited

 

[Speedwell]

Don't be ridiculous. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. You don't get to become president because some moistened bink lobbed a scimitar at you.

You made me forget the serious reply I was going to post.

 

[98cwitr]

We need to change the selection process first:
Abolish the Electoral College.
Replace all voting machines that don't have paper ballots with electronic machines with paper ballots. Have a large sign advising voters to read through their paper ballot before depositing it into the ballot box to make sure that his/her choices were accurately tallied.
Have publicly financed campaigns (this option is possible for presidential candidates, but unless both agree to accept the public funding it becomes an uneven exercise where one is clearly outspent).
If a candidate seriously misbehaves at a debate (stalking another debater like a crazed orangatung, discussing the size of his sexual organ, etc.) (s)he should be kicked off the debate floor while the debate continues with the grownups at the podiums.

Why advocate for tyranny of the majority? The EC exists strictly to combat that.

 

[Speedwell]

Return to the convention system. The Primaries are nothing but a travelling circus.

 

[Albion]

(I'm actually an Independent leaning toward Republican, well, maybe just at the moment, because neither party actually cares about low paid white males in manual work)

Well, if that is your concern, I don't know how you have much choice, considering that one of the political parties has made its #1 political policy doing everything possible to insure that people who are not Americans take all the jobs you are referring to!

 

[Speedwell]

Well, if that is your concern, I don't know how you have much choice, considering that one of the political parties has made its #1 political policy doing everything possible to insure that people who are not Americans take all the jobs you are referring to!

By not enforcing laws against hiring illegal aliens. I think both parties are guilty of that.

 

[Albion]

By not enforcing laws against hiring illegal aliens. I think both parties are guilty of that.

I just love it when the excuse comes back, "One party did a little of it but the other does it in spades, so there's no diff." We get that all the time around here.

 

[Speedwell]

I just love it when the excuse comes back, "One party did a little of it but the other does it in spades, so there's no diff." We get that all the time around here.

With respect to enforcing laws against hiring illegal aliens, what evidence do you have that either party has done it "in spades?" Other than spectacular show raids, the last serious long-term effort came during the Bush administration.