2007-01-25 15:14:34 · 14 answers · asked by Sailon 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
sp.- candidates...
2007-01-25 15:16:43 · update #1
REALLY outstanding is subjective. Some would argue there are already top notch people who have declared. Some of those same folks are hard put to give you any substantive positions a candidate has taken on an issue.Part of the cause for this is some candidates haven't said much other than "I can do a better job than Bush" (I'm a Dem, so I'm not slamming them)
Many of America's best & brightest would never consider the job. Who could blame them? Your entire life scrutinized to see if you (or any family member remotely close to you)have EVER exhibited a human flaw to be flaunted to demean your character.
People who can barely write or otherwise express themselves calling you abusive names & slinging libelous stories they read in someone's blog because they can...this is America!!
Your life & that of your family are an open book & physical threats are omnipresnt w the secret service always in your life to & keep you safe from anybody looking for their 15 minutes of fame.
Contrary to what people claim about getting rich, we pay the President, the leader of our country $250,000. (or did we bump it $50K) It's not about money, but by comparison $300k is the minimum a player may earn in Major League Baseball.
Constant travel, often spur of the moment to places you don't want to go.
Multi dimensional questions requiring DECISIONS that will rarely please all Americans, & often have no pleasant choice among the options.
There are many more ......I guess the question is .....WHY would anyone even consider the job unless they REALLY love America , regardless of the labels assigned to them so we can sort through the candidates without reading or learning too much..
2007-01-25 19:43:51 · answer #1 · answered by SantaBud 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wow, what a loaded question. In actuality it is (pretty much) unanswerable as the notion of exactly what consists of 'really outstanding' is a concept, and a rather vague one at that.
Having said that let me add this: personally I think that several candidates are very experienced and would make great leaders. As a US Senator, Ms. Clinton has demonstrated her ability to lead and Sen. Obama has also. His track record is not really a long one but he is intelligent, educated and listens to the people. The Governor from mass., while not exactly my own choice has also proven capable of leadership. I am only sorry that Sen. Kerry did not get the chance to be the US President as his ethics and morals are quite superior to the current US President's and he would have employed an intelligent domestic and international policy based on what was best for the countries interest, not just what was good for Haliburton's investments and Blackwater's jack booted 'mercenary' team.
2007-01-25 15:33:39 · answer #2 · answered by Terrania 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
it particularly is authentic. yet because of the fact the electoral college votes for the vice chairman besides because of the fact the President - the make up of the electoral college determines who would be the two President and vice chairman. and because a presidential candidate and vice chairman candidate are working at the same time the electoral college robotically elects them the two. Crabby - what you have reported isn't somewhat top. The 12th modification led to there being 2 votes extremely than one. under the unique shape whoever recieved the 2d maximum votes interior the college became the vice chairman.
2016-11-01 07:52:59 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Cause we have a bunch of snakes and flip floppers on the Democratic side, and the Republicans have been portrayed badly by recent scandals. Also we have presidential hopefuls just looking at a certain sector of America and hoping for their votes instead of looking at all Americans and looking for everyones votes.
Also the fact that you need millions of dollars to hope to be president plays a role in what kind of guy you'll get. Even poor people need a chance to be president, not just the rich.
2007-01-25 15:57:09 · answer #4 · answered by Ryan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because this country has gotten so blinded by picking the best of two evils, and with that type of outlook there will never be anyone "outstanding", both options are bad. Look outside the norm and you're sure to find someone worth voting for.
2007-01-25 15:55:09 · answer #5 · answered by dream.like.there.is.no.tomorrow 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Given the scrutiny they will be given by the press, and the name calling they will get by whatever side they DON'T belong to, would you want the job?
As long as Republicans and Democrats believe that the enemy is the other party, we're going to have mediocre candidates because no one with a strong agenda is going to be willing to deal with an oposition that wants only to discredit them -- and is willing to do anything to hurt them.
"America First" is a concept that has become alien to our politicians.
I long for a government that can say "Ok, I lost, but I'll work with you because issue X needs a solution." I don't expect to see it in my lifetime.
2007-01-25 15:27:07 · answer #6 · answered by aptacularcray 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It is a political position, and is the certified enemy of people on the other party.
Anyone with a right mind will probably not submit to these easily. Unless they like the power and frills that come with it.
2007-01-25 15:43:55 · answer #7 · answered by Tia T 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There haven't been any for a 100 years, and maybe those only look better because they are so far removed in time.
Thomas Jefferson seems to have been the best of them all (and he didn't really want the job!)
2007-01-25 15:24:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because the people who would make a great president have skeletons in their closets and they just don't want their families embarrassed by thing s that happened in their youth. We really do pry too much into people's backgrounds.
2007-01-25 15:29:15 · answer #9 · answered by Julia B 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
American voters chose image over substance?
2007-01-25 15:52:17 · answer #10 · answered by rostov 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋