User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 37

  1. #21
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    Why on earth should it matter if a candidate is likeable? It's the policies that matter.
    Never mind if somebody is dead ugly, arrogant, elitist, uncharismatic, has sex with a horse, has been divorced 5 times, cheats an their partner and sacrifices chicken blood to satan in their basement every night as long as they push the issues that I want to see advance.

    I find this focus on candidates as people highly irritating.
    That's the idea. Policy is easier to see through in such a candidate as Ron Paul, which does not translate to whether he is likeable or not. It just means that he has thrown most of the policies he is most likely for at you and you can take it or leave it.

    In candidates like Romney? Not as much until you get into the juicy bits like the 47% and the $2 trillion added military expenditure that he wants to put into place if he get into office.

    In such scenarios with mine when it comes to the GOP, a comparison would be something like this:
    Romney and Paul Ryan? So-so. Their policies? Not likeable.
    Ron Paul? Slightly Better. His policies? Half and Half.

  2. #22
    Unapologetic being Evolving Transparency's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    Why on earth should it matter if a candidate is likeable? It's the policies that matter.

    Never mind if somebody is dead ugly, arrogant, elistist, uncharismatic, has sex with a horse, has been divorced 5 times, cheats an their partner and sacrifices chicken blood to satan in their basement every night as long as they push the issues that I want to see advance.

    I find this focus on candidates as people highly irritating.
    me too. At least I did...for a really long time. Felt the same way. I really didn't see why it mattered if the president or president to be cheated on a wife. I feel like it's a thinker thing maybe? But I guess I am seeing that side that says "where are the morals?" especialy of the person that's going to be in charge of a whole buncha people. But what they look like is another story.. . I call that hollywoodization...no need to look kool...what you need to do is make descisions lol...but then again...someone could argue they are making a descision to look good? or what's percieved to be good looking to most...? I don't know though...not the #1 reason I vote for someone though...


    On the Ron Paul thing...I guess I just don't get why people don't like his policies then...lol...I feel like he has the best intentions at heart. And that yeah...he has big plans...we need to get outta what we are in...we need someone bold enough to do it. And along the way his boldness is not going to get in the way of our freedoms or hinder them....I just don't think we could ask for better...is it cause it's too idealistic...unrealistic...fantasy? I just don't get it...like even if it is unrealistic...we have suffered enough...shouldn't we try something new?
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

  3. #23
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    The Ron Paul phenomenon in the states is like the Ken Livingstone phenomenon in the UK in the eighties when he was the lord mayor of london, lots of people voted for him on the basis that he was like "the man in the pub" and "one of them", there was a superior line of comics about an occupation of britain to drain its off sea oil reserves by future cryto-fascist/nationalist Russian power which took the election of a radical "man in the pub" as its jumping off point, really to make the point that there was a reason why "the man in the pub", eminently reasonable and sensibly radical, could be the ruin of a country.

    Often the structural adjustments which are being proffered are hughly radical and suggested for a short term time span, the result is dislocation internationally, destabilisation domestically and creates a vulnerability to other predatory states which are not going to risk anything of the same order any time soon.

    The comic itself, if you want to look it up, is called SAVAGE: Taking liberties, its good and draws out the complicity and collusion of domestic intelligence agencies with the "new boss", the international diplomatic backdrop in which no former ally is going to give a damn about your occupation, no matter how shocking a thing it may be, if it jeopardises the "greater game" of international brinkmanship and some of the terrorism and atrocity which could happen any place not simply the middle east (a group called "traitors gate" based upon old British traditions of "headsmen" takes hostages and chops their heads off).

    It also features "fire fields" something which the Russians did use and are not an invention of the imagination, a semi-solid surface which if you stray upon it breaks, reacts with the oxgene in the air and sets you on fire like napalm. Interesting all in itself.

    So the relatability factor of any politicians is going to be really insufficent for me to reach any conclusions about them, especially if their ideology is about crazy radical restructuring over night, even more so if obviously only benefits one constituency, the rich one.
    have you seen a ron paul debate or interview???
    Sure he has a somewhat grandfatherly demeanor, but his speaking style and content give him a professorial presence which most people find incredibly hard to relate to. He is the furtherist thing from "the man in the pub."
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  4. #24
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    Why on earth should it matter if a candidate is likeable? It's the policies that matter.

    Never mind if somebody is dead ugly, arrogant, elistist, uncharismatic, has sex with a horse, has been divorced 5 times, cheats an their partner and sacrifices chicken blood to satan in their basement every night as long as they push the issues that I want to see advance.

    I find this focus on candidates as people highly irritating.
    *sigh*
    this is the problem with western society that we care little for virtue and only for utilitarian results. In america we used to elect people solely on their character and reputation. we were better off for it.
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    xxTP
    Posts
    1,261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    Why on earth should it matter if a candidate is likeable? It's the policies that matter.

    Never mind if somebody is dead ugly, arrogant, elistist, uncharismatic, has sex with a horse, has been divorced 5 times, cheats an their partner and sacrifices chicken blood to satan in their basement every night as long as they push the issues that I want to see advance.

    I find this focus on candidates as people highly irritating.
    There are different ways of viewing it. I personally believe that the character of a leader can change the course of history. Churchill's character saved Britain. Hitler's character destroyed Germany by his inability to be pragmatic. Franco's character to an extent saved Spain the pain of WW2.

    It is not just about the policies, because the ideologies of those leaders, which initially got them into power, would not necessarilly lead to those decisions they took.

    For example: not every Conservative had Churchill's vision and certainty (in fact very few did). Not every Nazi was as unpragmattic and uncompromising as Hitler. And not every Falangist was as pragmattic as Franco.

    IMO, character plays a huge role. Not only in the policies, but because the character and attitude of a leader, injects those same values into society.

    Look at the terrible effect which a corrupt leader, like Berlusconi, or Mugabe, or Putin, or Chavez, or Kirchner, or so many others I will not bother to name...has on the morals of their society. Regardless of their ideology. Because the society sees that robbery will be rewarded.

  6. #26
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    *sigh*
    this is the problem with western society that we care little for virtue and only for utilitarian results. In america we used to elect people solely on their character and reputation. we were better off for it.
    We'll have to agree to disagree then.

    Quote Originally Posted by Il Morto Che Parla View Post
    There are different ways of viewing it. I personally believe that the character of a leader can change the course of history. Churchill's character saved Britain. Hitler's character destroyed Germany by his inability to be pragmatic. Franco's character to an extent saved Spain the pain of WW2.

    It is not just about the policies, because the ideologies of those leaders, which initially got them into power, would not necessarilly lead to those decisions they took.

    For example: not every Conservative had Churchill's vision and certainty (in fact very few did). Not every Nazi was as unpragmattic and uncompromising as Hitler. And not every Falangist was as pragmattic as Franco.

    IMO, character plays a huge role. Not only in the policies, but because the character and attitude of a leader, injects those same values into society.

    Look at the terrible effect which a corrupt leader, like Berlusconi, or Mugabe, or Putin, or Chavez, or Kirchner, or so many others I will not bother to name...has on the morals of their society. Regardless of their ideology. Because the society sees that robbery will be rewarded.
    I'm not convinced that individuals have this much impact. It is probably a mixture of the right (or wrong) person for a specific point in time and macrostructural factors. These individuals did not grow up on a deserted island, they too were the product of their time and culture. And they would not have been able to work against the population and the elites of their countries.The conditions have to be right. There is always a set up.

    And most of the people you mentioned are or were considered charming and charismatic strong leaders by their followers. So if you went by character only, either one of them would be a good choice.
    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    have you seen a ron paul debate or interview???
    Sure he has a somewhat grandfatherly demeanor, but his speaking style and content give him a professorial presence which most people find incredibly hard to relate to. He is the furtherist thing from "the man in the pub."
    Dont mistake that particular "local colloqualism" (spelling), it could mean the man of supposed "common sense", it is a relateability factor but of a highly ideological character. The "why dont we do this" which will be radically destabilising but is abstractly popular or populist.

  8. #28
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Character obviously matters in leadership. The fate of entire countries and communities are at stake, and you better have somebody who can handle the situation best. An immature person to give one example would not be qualified for such a position. Character in leaders can also be the factor that helps get policies implemented, not only effectively but also justly. Integrity is another positive feature for a leader, as well as magnanimity. These are all elements of character.

    It also helps to note the distinction between character and personality. It seems several people are confusing the two.

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    Character obviously matters in leadership. The fate of entire countries and communities are at stake, and you better have somebody who can handle the situation best. An immature person to give one example would not be qualified for such a position. Character in leaders can also be the factor that helps get policies implemented, not only effectively but also justly. Integrity is another positive feature for a leader, as well as magnanimity. These are all elements of character.

    It also helps to note the distinction between character and personality. It seems several people are confusing the two.
    A lot of psychologists use those interchangeably, character structure and personality for instance, although I think you are using character in a traditionalist and perhaps ideological sense.

  10. #30
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    A lot of psychologists use those interchangeably, character structure and personality for instance, although I think you are using character in a traditionalist and perhaps ideological sense.
    I'm basing this on classical distinctions. Character is often involves one's sense of virtue, personality is more about innate qualities. Integrity for example is a matter of character; charisma is a matter of personality. They certainly do overlap at times, but that's not the same to say they're the same.

Similar Threads

  1. Bob Barr or Ron Paul?
    By 6sticks in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-28-2008, 08:42 PM
  2. Can you help make my dream come true?
    By ladypinkington in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-17-2008, 06:32 PM
  3. Ron Paul
    By Paul3144 in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-06-2008, 11:14 AM
  4. Ron Paul Tea Party... will you be donating?
    By file cabinet in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 12-20-2007, 03:19 PM
  5. Ron Paul Wins Another Presidential Debate
    By FranG in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-18-2007, 12:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO