Scotty Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Was reading a column by Robert Fulford the other day which basically dismisses all the current Republican presidential contenders as unfit for office, and has little good to say about Obama either. So I was wondering, discarding all the rules about party politics and primaries, who people think would, if plucked from whatever they're doing now, make the best US President, and why. I'm guessing it would either be some other politician, or someone high in the business world, a person of great accomplishment. But that's probably because those are the only people we know. Maybe the dentist who lives next door would make a great leader, but it's unlikely he'll ever be given that opportunity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Who should be US president? Whomever American voters choose, as provided for in their Constitution. Your question is like asking Americans who should be Canada's prime minister. Another US federal election....and Canada want's a piece of the action? Edited October 10, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted October 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Who should be US president? Whomever American voters choose, as provided for in their Constitution. Your question is like asking Americans who should be Canada's prime minister. Another US federal election....and Canada want's a piece of the action? American politics are of interest to Canadians, else this particular forum would not exist on this particular web site. If you're suggesting Canadians shouldn't be discussing American politics then maybe you should delete your account and get lost, because the counterpart would be you have no valid reason to be discussing anything about Canadian politics on a Canadian web site. So leave. I guarantee you nobody here will miss you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) American politics are of interest to Canadians, else this particular forum would not exist on this particular web site. Including suggestions as to who should be their elected leaders? How long do you think that would fly in Canada? should - auxiliary verb 1. simple past tense of shall. 2. (used to express condition): Were he to arrive, I should be pleased. 3. must; ought (used to indicate duty, propriety, or expediency): You should not do that. 4. would (used to make a statement less direct or blunt): I should think you would apologize. If you're suggesting Canadians shouldn't be discussing American politics then maybe you should delete your account and get lost, because the counterpart would be you have no valid reason to be discussing anything about Canadian politics on a Canadian web site. Discussing is one thing...deciding who should be elected is quite another. Your "discussion" proposes not only to ignore the American political process but decide who the winner should be. So leave. I guarantee you nobody here will miss you. I could have left years ago, but America would remain in spades. Edited October 10, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 There is nothing wrong with a hypothetical discussion of who people would like to see as US president. It is not "deciding" anything or "interfering" with the american political process. Anyway... it seems clear to me that politicians, in general, are not selected based on their skills in management and leadership. Rather, it is oratory, connections, and skilled deception that enables politicians to succeed. I think a succesful CEO would be a much more logical choice for this type of leadership position, preferably one with a proven track record of revitalizing large stagnant companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Mitt Romney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I find American elections take way too long, They have a year to promote themselves while Canada has around a month I think maybe the right amount of time for an election is 4 or 5 months Who should be the President? Doesn't matter to me, I never like any of them anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Mitt Romney. He's hollow and fake. He magically remade himself into some new man after his pathetic run for the nomination in 2008. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 There is nothing wrong with a hypothetical discussion of who people would like to see as US president. It is not "deciding" anything or "interfering" with the american political process. "Would like to see" is different from how the OP is titled. The idea of "who people think would" is provided in the text of the OP, but the title is less flexible. This cycle is repeated from 2008, wherein 15% of polled Canadians wanted to vote for US president. Anyway... it seems clear to me that politicians, in general, are not selected based on their skills in management and leadership. Rather, it is oratory, connections, and skilled deception that enables politicians to succeed. I think a succesful CEO would be a much more logical choice for this type of leadership position, preferably one with a proven track record of revitalizing large stagnant companies. I disagree....technocrats make poor politicians....logic does not apply. The very nature of the job is "political". The choice is made through a grueling election process that weds money and issues to a winning candidate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Just another reason for American conservatives to be depressed about the current line-up. Here's a "front-runner", Michelle Bachmann, who can't muster the courage to directly answer a simple and straightforward question about whether or not Mormonism is a cult. Earlier in this interview, Bachmann told Candy Crowley that he has fifty-five years of experience as a tax lawyer, or something. It was jaw-droppingly painful to watch. Bachmann is literally a robot, she just goes into the same talking regardless of whatever question she's asked. It's embarrassing. Bachmann also said she would reinstate DADT if given the opportunity. It's crazy. Edited October 10, 2011 by Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I'm not thrilled about the current "front-runners," but then, I don't see any other nations' leaders as any 'better' than ours. I wasn't any more impressed with Canada's candidates than I am with those in the running for our next election. Having said that, it's too soon for me to say who I think should be the next POTUS - I'll sit back and watch some more before I decide who would be the best choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I find American elections take way too long, They have a year to promote themselves while Canada has around a month... I have a theory that Canadians get tired of the long advertising and news content intrusion for election cycles they cannot participate in, but still wish to watch American broadcast television across the border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I'm not thrilled about the current "front-runners," but then, I don't see any other nations' leaders as any 'better' than ours. I wasn't any more impressed with Canada's candidates than I am with those in the running for our next election. Having said that, it's too soon for me to say who I think should be the next POTUS - I'll sit back and watch some more before I decide who would be the best choice. It's kind of a sad commentary on the current partisan political climate and it's inability to attract the right kind of person willing to step into that crucible,is'nt it? That's not a partisan shot,just an observation because I also was'nt impressed with my potential Prime Ministerial choices back in May... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I'm not thrilled about the current "front-runners," but then, I don't see any other nations' leaders as any 'better' than ours. I wasn't any more impressed with Canada's candidates than I am with those in the running for our next election. Having said that, it's too soon for me to say who I think should be the next POTUS - I'll sit back and watch some more before I decide who would be the best choice. We're even worse off than you are, when a guy like Harper can be described as "far-right wing". Reflexive anti-Americanism still wins votes in this country, and it's a tactic that is regularly used by the NDP and Liberal Party. It's inextricable from a dominant leftist political culture that is getting worse and worse in Canada every year. Still, it shouldn't make you feel much better to point your finger at us and recognize that disgusting politicians like Layton are lionized in their deaths, and socialists who can't even speak English like Stephane Dion are appointed to lead one of the dominant political parties in our most recent federal election. Just because Canada is on the expressway to self-destruction doesn't mean you should follow suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Canadians do not get to directly elect their prime minister....perhaps this helps to explain a desire by some to select the American president, something they could actually do...with US citizenship. Edited October 10, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 .... Just because Canada is on the expressway to self-destruction doesn't mean you should follow suit. America is stronger than any single president...no reigning monarch either to settle matters. America is stronger because of conflict, not in spite of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Canadians do not get to directly elect their prime minister....perhaps this helps to explain a desire by some to select the American president, something they could actually do...with US citizenship. Yeah, technically that's true, but the leadership of the party is the single biggest motivator for people to vote one way or the other. The vast majority of Canadians know nothing about their respective MPs, and vote for the MP who belongs to the party with the leader they prefer. In other words, if you liked Dion best, then you'd vote for the MP in your riding who belongs to the Liberal Party. Although technically it's different in Canada, the same things inform people's politics - namely, which personality they most strongly identify with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 It's kind of a sad commentary on the current partisan political climate and it's inability to attract the right kind of person willing to step into that crucible,is'nt it? That's not a partisan shot,just an observation because I also was'nt impressed with my potential Prime Ministerial choices back in May... I can't disagree. I can't muster any enthusiasm for any candidates - Obama or any Republicans - this time around. And as I said, I felt the same way regarding your choices last election. It's rather discouraging not to have much confidence in one's choice for leadership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I have a theory that Canadians get tired of the long advertising and news content intrusion for election cycles they cannot participate in, but still wish to watch American broadcast television across the border. Have you seen Canadian tv? most of it sucks, Corner Gas is good though But hey you might not have noticed that many American tv shows and movies are taped in Canada ..namely Vancouver, Victoria and Toronto Rookie Blue is a Canadian tv show and gets around 9 or 10 million viewers an episode down south even though it sucks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Have you seen Canadian tv? most of it sucks, Corner Gas is good though But hey you might not have noticed that many American tv shows and movies are taped in Canada ..namely Vancouver, Victoria and Toronto Rookie Blue is a Canadian tv show and gets around 9 or 10 million viewers an episode down south even though it sucks But ya, American tv shows are far suprerior...The Wire, The Shield, Breaking Bad, Dexter, 24, Damages, Six Feet Under can't top those Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Yeah, technically that's true, but the leadership of the party is the single biggest motivator for people to vote one way or the other. The vast majority of Canadians know nothing about their respective MPs, and vote for the MP who belongs to the party with the leader they prefer.... So you are telling me that Canadians participate in federal elections backwards on purpose to get around the Westminster model? Party leadership is not voted on either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 America is stronger than any single president...no reigning monarch either to settle matters. America is stronger because of conflict, not in spite of it. That's true and I certainly wasn't implying otherwise, but there is a pathway to self-destruction, primarily through crazy spending, which America embarked on long ago. Mind you, America isn't alone, Canada is probably ahead of the curve in some ways. I just don't see any reason to be optimistic about broad issues in the long-term. I think that the West is finished, and I think this is a consequence of the ever growing influence of leftist politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Have you seen Canadian tv? most of it sucks, Corner Gas is good though The only Canadian production I see on a regular basis are old Red Green shows on PBS. Davinci's Inquest shows up once in a while as filler late on Sunday night. But hey you might not have noticed that many American tv shows and movies are taped in Canada ..namely Vancouver, Victoria and Toronto That's swell, so are GMC Trucks a Canadian car make? Rookie Blue is a Canadian tv show and gets around 9 or 10 million viewers an episode down south even though it sucks Never heard of it.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 We're even worse off than you are, when a guy like Harper can be described as "far-right wing". He is pretty much Right Wing, and since Canada is a more liberal nation as a whole, I can see why Harper would be regarded as "far" right wing. Reflexive anti-Americanism still wins votes in this country, and it's a tactic that is regularly used by the NDP and Liberal Party. It's inextricable from a dominant leftist political culture that is getting worse and worse in Canada every year. I don't disagree; I can see that, from my observations. I find it rather perplexing. Still, it shouldn't make you feel much better to point your finger at us and recognize that disgusting politicians like Layton are lionized in their deaths, and socialists who can't even speak English like Stephane Dion are appointed to lead one of the dominant political parties in our most recent federal election. Just because Canada is on the expressway to self-destruction doesn't mean you should follow suit. Without commenting on your observations re: your politicians, I didn't mean to imply that it makes me feel better that I don't see better leaders/choices elsewhere; I pointed it out because I grow weary of hearing from foreigners how terrible our choices/leaders are - as if the U.S. stands alone in that regard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 So you are telling me that Canadians participate in federal elections backwards on purpose to get around the Westminster model? Party leadership is not voted on either. What I'm saying is that when the federal or provincial (and to a lesser extent, municipal) elections roll around, people overwhelmingly vote for the MP that belongs to the same party as the potential PM or Premier that they prefer. The vast majority of Canadians couldn't identify a photograph of their own federal or provincial MPs, although more of them would recognize the likenesses of the federal and provincial potential leaders from the respective parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.