Would you want to be the President?

It's a silly question. (Don't take that personal) The kind of people that like that kind of stuff are the kind of people that want to do it. You want fame money and power for the rest of your life.... ya, being one of the most powerful people on the planet must really suck. Do you honestly believe those that want the power and spotlight give a rats butt what the commoners or opposition think?

And as far as aging at double the rate... no, they haven't. What ever that means. They have not aged at double the rate of those willing to put their goals and ambitions in front of everything else no matter what. Par for the course.

Bush Sr. had been hob nobbing with the powerful elite since before he got to office.

That may be true, but out of all the presidents in my lifetime, he's the one I'd give the benefit of the doubt.  He was the Director of Central Intelligence during the height of the Cold War, before he eventually became president.  I can't say for sure, but I believe he saw threats that at least partly motivated him to enter the political arena.

Wait.....I didn't realize that I could want to become President just so I could bomb someone.  I change my mind, I'd do it!

Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy

Originally posted by powerman

It's a silly question. (Don't take that personal) The kind of people that like that kind of stuff are the kind of people that want to do it. You want fame money and power for the rest of your life.... ya, being one of the most powerful people on the planet must really suck. Do you honestly believe those that want the power and spotlight give a rats butt what the commoners or opposition think?

 

And as far as aging at double the rate... no, they haven't. What ever that means. They have not aged at double the rate of those willing to put their goals and ambitions in front of everything else no matter what. Par for the course.

I respectfully disagree. I look back a ways and there are only a few presidents I'd place in the category of desiring "fame, money, and power for the rest of their lives." Many of them I wouldn't. For instance, starting off with Eisenhower, I don't see Ike as the type who wanted all that. I'd fast-forward past JFK who's private life illustrated a massive desire to take full advantage of his position in life. LBJ, extremely power-hungry (and I'm not convinced he didn't have something to do with JFK's early departure). Nixon was as power-hungry as they come. Gerald Ford? Money, power, fame? Nah. Jimmy Carter? Fame, money, power? I don't see it. Reagan? Fame, money, power? I don't see it. Bush Sr.? Nope. Clinton...see JFK. W. ...I'm not convinced. Obama. no, I don't see it. It's politics. Folks have different ideas as to what's best for the nation. Some do everything they can to get to the top (see Nixon), others rise out of circumstance (see Ford)...others hear a call from their party. btw, it's a terrible job to have. You have to have thick skin. How many jobs are guaranteeing you will be disliked by almost half of every voting citizen? I worked as a high school basketball ref for about 7 years. That's as close as ya come to the "like/dislike" split! I will say I enjoyed the work so maybe I shouldn't rule out a future run!

Sorry, not buying it. Colin Powell... served his country, understood duty, understood leadership, understood politics... would not touch the Presidency with a 100 foot pole.... why, because he didn't want it. Primary reason I would have voted for him.

Of all of them, sure, Carter was a humble man that wanted to serve his "community". Money, power, and fame didn't really fit him. He is about the only one that does not fit my mold... but the rest of them, especially today???

Bush Sr. had been hob nobbing with the powerful elite since before he got to office. Same with Jr. And Obama... seriously, he's a narcissist plain and simple. No, not because FOX news says so... because he is. I can't speak for early America.... but for modern times he has to be the most undeserving President in history.... and one of the worst to boot.

Nobody has a gun to anyone's head. Carter is probably more pure humanitarian. Everyone else wants it, or they would not do it.

Just to advance in my place of work, I can see what there is for me further up the ladder. I don't want the top. It's a choice.

I am actually baffled right now that you can actually believe this. Look at any group of people all the way from church groups, PTA, up to the President. There are those that want to be in control, and those that do not. There are literally MILLIONS of ways to serve and contribute from here to the POTUS for those that want to. MILLIONS. Every single group I have EVER been involved in, the majority in control WANT to be in control. And those that don't "rarely" are.

And I always get a chuckle when I hear about how much these folks can be making in the private sector.... do you have any idea how much "power" is worth? Ask Clinton how much being President has made him. You actually believe he could be better off if he would have been a lawyer instead of a politician sitting in the most powerful seat on the planet? You do realize people pay him hundreds of thousands of dollars just for him to show up and open his mouth right? His calendar is booked. And where exactly does one get to be a leader of industry, or the top in his field, making "1000 times more".... with no headaches??? CD... seriously. Come on.

Ya, go down the line. Every single wrung on every single ladder requires more stress, responsibility, and headaches. And it gives you more money, more control, and more position and status. That does not mean every single person is self centered selfish control freaks... but it certainly does not make them Gahdi either. And I know TONS of people that make the conscious decision not to step into the spot light, and TONS that do.

And yes, some did honestly think they could help serve their nation. Now what kind of a mind set does it take, to think that out of 300 million people, and tens of thousands of bright and ambitious people in politics.... that YOU, are the right person for the job and can help out. That takes a special mind set right there. Some selflessness... sure, but nowhere close to all.

 btw, yes, I agree with your point (which makes sense) regarding folks that rise to the top. But, the difference between that guy or gal that heads the PTA, or a science project team, or a student government, is in their ability to command respect. Love them or hate them, or a combo of both, SOMEONE will rise to the top of each party, and they're not nominating people dragged in kicking and screaming. As much of a humanitarian many of these former (and current) president/s were and are, they all believed they could make a difference by being POTUS. ...and yes, of course a retired POTUS can command millions with every speech. That said, there's a difference between great communicators (Reagan, Clinton, Obama) and lesser-skilled communicators (Carter, GHWB, W) Do you really see all of these guys as money-grubbing individuals? I really don't. We can agree to disagree. btw, in the history of this nation no POTUS has to deal with as obstructionist a Congress as exists today. Not even close. It's the toughest job in the world, and it's only gotten tougher.

Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy I hear ya on the personal stories of leadership in your business...I think we've all seen that in every organization out there no matter how small. Let's try to find some common ground, obviously we are not going to agree on our president who I believe to be most excellent, and you believe to be terrible. There isn't a human being alive, nor a fictional character, or deity for that matter that could take the office of POTUS and be supported by liberals and conservatives. Those on the "other side" are instantly demonized. I guess what I was trying to get at with the narcissist claim (which in President Obama's case just isn't true in my opinion) is that when I think narcissist, I literally think of the guy or gal that can't stop looking at their self, or can't get enough of listening to their self. For example, '04 VP candidate John Edwards. Safe to say there were some narcissistic tendencies? How 'bout 75% of NFL wide receivers? I'd say so. Lady GaGa? Miley Cyrus? I guess those are my images of narcissists. Terrell Owens, Floyd Mayweather, etc. To say the president "can't get enough of himself," just doesn't make sense to me. btw, to say he can't lead, well, he certainly led two dominant presidential campaigns weathering storms that would have taken lesser-skilled politicians completely out of contention. He led the charge for health care reform, and like it or not, he got it through and protected it from the opposition fighting tooth and nail (literally to the point they'd have been happy to shut down the government and let the nation go down the tube just to prevent it from existing). He's been out front protecting our country, gunning down terrorist after terrorist with drones that are hated both by Libertarians and liberal ACLU supporters. He's found himself on the correct side of history supporting gay rights when many thought it would be "too soon" or "too risky." Not too shabby for an "empty suit." powerman, I like your posts too. keep 'em coming...the more we talk, the more chance we'll actually find some common ground slightly closer together.

OK, I accept your narcissist and raise you arrogant. "An inflated sense of one's own importance"... certainly applies. If you want to think of it as vanity, which isn't really the definition, but I get it. 

***I just checked out wikipedia's page on narcissism...it just doesn't fit President Obama. If anything he strikes me as a man who if you want to cut down, you'd have to say he's overly cerebral. By looking at issues from so many angles, by the time he's decided to go with a decision, the opposition's already dug their heels in and won't give an inch, period.

As far as his leadership skills.... so what you are saying is he is a savvy self marketer. I could not believe he defeated the Clinton political machine.
When he made his first victory speech in a big win over Clinton for the nomination (forget which) I watched his speech to see what he had to say. I knew right then he would be the next POTUS. He's a great motivational speaker with prepared speeches. He's not that great of an orator when talking. 

***I disagree. Again, not one of his debates was a "prepared speech." With the exception of the first debate vs. Romney, and the one debate in Philly? against Hillary, he didn't lose another debate.

But that is the problem with the Health care

***...umm, there are lots of problems with the ACA. A narcissist would deny there's ANY problem. He's acknowledged (as have all experts on the subject out there) there are problems...BUT, the pre-existing system was absolutely unsustainable. The fear-mongering that still exists out there today telling stories of the gloom and doom of the bogeyman "Socialized Medicine," were the same exact cries Congress and the President heard back in the '60's when Medicare was rolled out.

***We'll agree to disagree. HC reform was a bear of a task. Does it need tweaks? Absolutely. That said, the major battle was won by Democrats led by President Obama. (you mean that narcissist labeled it ObamaCare? ...heard that one from a Righty friend of mine) ...and actually, no, the term was not coined by the president or his team.

Continuing the prior POTUS policies on war when you campaigned against every one of them is not a win.

***Oh, you mean like giving a set date for troop pull-outs from foreign wars? The list of differences in foreign policy is long. Also, do you honestly believe Romney would have ended the war in Iraq? I do not. The use of drones against terrorists bent on attacking the US or its citizens abroad is a good thing. Does it matter if it's a fundamentalist imam living abroad? To me, and most Americans, absolutely not. They're going down, and I'm glad.

Supporting gays when it is most convenient to you and after you won the election is not leadership either. I have no idea where you get this "too soon" idea. He supported them when he had more to gain than loose. What is respectable about that?

 

***Really? It was about 6 months ahead of the '12 election when he decided to support gay marriage. It was not even close to a slam-dunk positive. I was very concerned that very day he may have just lost the election. I know many folks personally that shifted their support based on that issue alone. Quite sad, to think so many people think their own marriage is negatively affected by someone else's. Makes no sense, but I digress!

Here's the deal with leadership... on the campaign trail you can talk all the crap and blame your opponent all you want. When you get the job, you roll up your sleeves and get to work. Some say Obama actually had a decent history of being bridge divides. When he got to office, and it was apparent the GOPs strategy was going to oppose everything no matter what... he just said screw it, and stopped trying. I get that... it's what I would do... but I do not have the skills to lead my organization let alone the country which is why I don't ask for the job. All he has done is pour more gas on the partisan fire.

***What did you want him to do? It's like wanting to get with that girl you see across the gymnasium in high school. She's told all her friends she hates your guts, she's basically told you and everyone she knows you can "go eat sh!* and die." Hmm, what magical words could even George Washington exhumed from the grave and brought back to life have said?

Continually blaming the last guy 6 years down the road is just poor leadership.

***We hit a skid beginning in '07 under W that was downright perilous and it's a fact we hadn't been that economically crippled since the Great Depression. It took a long while for the US to dig out of that Depression as well. When asked about the slow recovery, he was factual. The prior administration drove us into a pretty deep ditch.

He knew what the problem with DC was when he took the job. He knew he was assuming the Presidency at a time the country was more divided since the Civil War. He knew it was not going to be easy.

***Yep. Totally agree.

In that role alone... not his affiliation or political philosophy... in that role he has been a dismal failure.

***Nope, totally disagree. My retirement (and many around the country) has never looked better. Many folks on the Right were locked into hating the President even before he was elected. Fox News keeps beating the drum. GOP Senators and Congressmen have continued the beating as well. Despite the fact we continue to recover, despite the fact we're drawing down militarily in Afghanistan, have left Iraq, have reached a nuclear deal with Iran, etc.

It is indeed exactly what I expected from a guy with his resume. He is/was not the answer.

Now trust me... that in no way what so ever means I think McCain/Palin would have been better. I would not have voted for her, but I actually think Clinton would have done a better job... and she is certainly a polarizing figure (which is why she didn't get the nod... ironic to say the least).

***That's about the only positive I can draw from the GOP's "destroy President Obama at all costs" campaign. They are shooting themselves in the foot with the whole "President Hillary Clinton would have been an improvement." Why? Every time they say it, just cue the '16 commercials supporting President Clinton for election. When the Right behaves like rabid attack dogs, they lose in the long run. Rabid attack dogs don't think long-term.

Do I know of anyone right now that could be better... actually, I think Romney would have been. Not Romney the candidate, Romney the man... he is actually quite moderate. Who knows what his Presidency would have looked like... but he had to bend over for the GOP, so it is not really a good example. I watched a documentary on him on PBS and he did some good work in Mass, and had quite a life. The same documentary went over Obama... his big claim to fame... what got him noticed by the DNC... is he figured out a loop hole to get Federal money to tear down projects and build high rise condos. He made a crap ton of money for a lot of people when he was in IL. 

I don't know who could lead this country right now. I know I do not want Clinton or another Bush. I know there are more than two families that can run this country.

***Well, unless someone else emerges, Hillary Clinton has to be considered the favorite. They've all got skeletons, but how 'bout Rubio? It seems to me he's the GOP's only hope. Losing Hispanics at a 70-30 clip is a death blow to the GOP. Kinda tough to win this large group over when you've got GOP and Tea Party folks shouting to "send those illegal aliens back!"

I really wish Powell would step up and "serve". I really admire him and he seems to be able to straddle the line. I would "trust" that he would be working for the countries best interest.

***I don't know...every time I flip on Hannity he's talking about how Powell is basically a Democrat in disguise. Ya gotta be careful who you wish for.

So I can rant all I want about Obama, but it isn't like I have a long list of folks I would rather have. Because I will concede to you that I agree.... the Capital is divided and so is the country. Yes we have "problems" we need solved, but right now the biggest problem is we are not getting along and there is a deep divide on which direction American's think this country needs to head. That is a HUGE problem, and I do not know who is going to be able to solve that.