• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

What makes a good President?

Tellenbach

in dreamland
Joined
Oct 27, 2013
Messages
6,088
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Jazzy Orchid said:
But considering how many people voted for Obama, desiring him to in fact remove those troops, can we exactly blame him for doing what the people wanted?

He could've removed most of the troops and left behind enough to provide security or at the very least delayed the matter until enough Iraqi forces were trained.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
19,681
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I believed the WMD threat and so did Hillary and Biden. Removing an asshole like Saddam is always a good idea, but the USA shouldn't bear the brunt of the cost and if the UN/NATO aren't helping then we shouldn't do it unless it's a threat to national security.

I dunno, I didn't find a bunch of metal pipes and trailers terribly convincing. I don't remember Colin Powell's presentation really passing muster; no wonder the U.N. didn't go along with it.

It was also fairly obvious that the Dubya administration was setting up "moving goalposts" for Saddam at the time. They had a certain outcome they wanted, and they just needed to sell it. That alone raised my suspicion.

Plus there were reports about faulty and fraudulent intelligence even before the war started; they just weren't making the headlines.
 

tinker683

Whackus Bonkus
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
2,882
MBTI Type
ISFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I guess for me the ideal leader would be a Josiah Barlett

1) Strong sense of civic duty and responsibility
2) Surrounds himself with good people who also share the above with him

I'm not really sure I could go any further than that. Certainly as a Democrat I'd be more inclined toward Presidents who took up causes I supported but even if a Republican got elected that had the above two qualities, I wouldn't feel so anxious about the future of my country as I do now.

*Edit: Also, I just started watching the West Wing again and holy shit I didn't realize how much I missed having leaders that actually cared*
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,874
Countries are too big. We did not evolve to co-exist on such a grand scale and multi-generational long campaign to adapt ourselves and our governments to what our psychologies require will be required to have truly good leaders.


I find this argument culturally biased. True, building long term stability isn't easy task but it can be achieved in general. Silly example: My grand grand parents had socialized healthcare and I have it as well. Our leadership wasn't that great through this time but having everyone on the same boat in many issues is possible. Especially if people don't look just after their own ass, but that is a question of nurture more than anything else.


Plus the best leaders are likely to rise exactly when everything is in toilet. Since then cheap partisan politics is the least relevant.
 

Red Memories

Haunted Echoes
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Messages
6,280
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
215
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I guess for me the ideal leader would be a Josiah Barlett

1) Strong sense of civic duty and responsibility
2) Surrounds himself with good people who also share the above with him

I'm not really sure I could go any further than that. Certainly as a Democrat I'd be more inclined toward Presidents who took up causes I supported but even if a Republican got elected that had the above two qualities, I wouldn't feel so anxious about the future of my country as I do now.

*Edit: Also, I just started watching the West Wing again and holy shit I didn't realize how much I missed having leaders that actually cared*

I appreciate hearing someone say they wouldn't be as concerned with a republican who actually held those values. Do you have a perspective on who you feel the last good republican was, from a democrat perspective?

Do you feel democrats today have lost some of these two values?
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,585
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Several things come to mind from Trump's mishandling of the Coronavirus crisis which he exacerbated through his incompetence.

A good president is, at the least, mentally and intellectually competent (having high intelligence goes along with that). He or she doesn't need to be Einstein, they don't have to be egg-headish, but they do need to have some monumental intellectual powers, an ability for grasping and solving complex problems and a more than superficial understanding for policy. Bill Clinton, JFK, and Obama were all highly competent in this area. Low intelligence leaders like Trump, Reagan and GWBush whose backgrounds were either fickle or ready-made handed to them are the epitome of presidential incompetence. They run a very simple-minded approach to foreign policy and serious domestic problems...they lack vision and imaginative sweep for the modern forces at work..they just kind of react to events. As events have revealed, these aren't guys you want in charge when Crisis hits.

A good president is, at the least, somebody who stays informed about matters which affect the public health. With Trump, the February 9th study informed that COVID-19 carried a rapid transmission rate and that asymptomatic patients are "super-spreaders." Trump failed to warn the American public about the degree of risk, he failed in his duty to keep himself informed about COVID-19 and he misled the public into believing that the risk of infection was very low. Now the USA leads the world in number of infections, and Trump is on his way to bankrupting the economy just like he bankrupted his businesses several times. George W. Bush claimed that Saddam Hussein had WMDs and was in cahoots with Al Qaeda...of course that was all a lie. Basically, he lied to get the USA into a stupid occupation of Iraq which ultimately opened the door for both ISIS and Iran.

A good president shows a combination of energy and political savvy during a crisis. In contrast, Trump's combination of low energy do-nothing but keyboard warrior on Twitter is but the exact opposite. For example, Trump has been inept in cleaning up his mess -- was still shrugging the whole thing off by late February and leaving it to his VP....basically did nothing for two months to strengthen our infrastructure and showed excessive hesitancy in utilizing the defense production act...in contrast, FDR who was a fusion of high energy and a political virtuoso had mass production in the Country moving right away when he took over during the great depression and later the War after Pearl Harbor. Right now, America's infrastructure for handling pandemics is inferior to the infrastructure in countries that trump reportedly calls "Third World".

A good president shows strength when it comes time to take off the velvet glove and drop the iron-fist. Trump failed to do that in his weakness for shutting down the borders at the beginning of this thing. Although he claims that he shut down travel from China, flights were coming in and going out regularly to Hong Kong and mainland China. If he had kept himself informed, he would have understood how this thing could spread and taken drastic measures in the beginning so it didn't get out of control. Perhaps it was his vulnerability for the "great economy" that did not want to tamper with, but a good president would play for the long-run on that. Trump also failed to do that in his delay for activating the defense production act and not declaring Martial Law early on in high risk areas where 50 percent of the residents were not following the social distancing guidelines.

A good president shows steadiness during a crisis. Trump has been excessively erratic and keeps changing course for reasons that lack any merit. Trump first downplayed the coronavirus crisis. Then, he started to take it more seriously. Then he broke from the experts and idiotically started calling for the economy to start moving again the day after Easter. Now he's backpedaled on that once again and wants to extend social distancing to April 30th. That's good but all of this wishy-washy back and forth delays action. Although flexibility is good when newly discovered evidence renders a course of action idiotic, the data on COVID-19 has never changed and has always been out there for Trupm to inform himself with...he had a duty to know about COVID-19's rapid transmission rate back on February 9th when the landmark study was published. Trump's erraticism and about-faces are due to a misplaced effort on his part to prioritize the economy over public health.

That leads into the last point. A good president prioritizes public health over economic prosperity. If another country invades the USA or a virus like COVID-19 invades the USA, defeating those enemies must take precedent over running a strong economy, in the event one of those has to be expendable. If you can do both at the same time, great, but if not, economic prosperity has to be put on the backburner until the situation is under control.

Really good post. Reagan was actually pretty good though.
 

tinker683

Whackus Bonkus
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
2,882
MBTI Type
ISFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I appreciate hearing someone say they wouldn't be as concerned with a republican who actually held those values. Do you have a perspective on who you feel the last good republican was, from a democrat perspective?

Do you feel democrats today have lost some of these two values?

George H W Bush would be the last one that I could remember. I was in college when Bush Jr was in office and while I did not doubt the mans sense of civic responsibility, I did feel he made a lot of decisions that were the worst of this country. I disagreed heavily with many of his policies (both for political and moral reasons) but, unlike Trump, I didn’t doubt the mans patriotism or his sense of loyalty to his country.

Trump I can not say that.

To your last question: Largely, no I don’t feel they have. Certainly the Dems have made decisions in the past 10 years I don’t agree with, but I also feel like they’re in a situation in which they are perpetually dealing with bad faith actors and it doesn’t surprise me that in order to score a few victories here and there, they’ve had to agree to bills that in a world full of lawmakers acting in good faith, they might have not had too.

That being said, I do feel that given how polarized Republicans have become, that’s put the Democrats in the inherently un-winnable position of both satisfying the growing number of liberals (myself included) who really don’t see any further value in attempts at bipartisanship and therefore polarizing themselves and also being the ones expected to be the ‘grown ups’ in the room and try to compromise with a group of people (Republicans) who have absolutely no interest in compromise so something can get done. I’m grateful that their are leaders who still try and do that but until the Republicans renounce Trumpism, I don’t see the situation improving at all.
 

Red Memories

Haunted Echoes
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Messages
6,280
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
215
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Define good.

I am asking you to define "good" for the sake of this. :) So you define your view of "good" in this sense and possibly examples of this, characteristics, and anyone you can think of who fits the bill.
 

The Cat

Just a Magic Cat who hangs out at the Crossroads.
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
23,767
A good president doesn't eat their people, nor allow their people to be eaten by others. :shrug:
 

Red Memories

Haunted Echoes
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Messages
6,280
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
215
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
For those who have participated:
In your opinion, say someone does not meet these requires, should a new easier process of impeachment be involved for the President? Should it be easier to "impeach" ill-acting lower level authorities as well?
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,874
For those who have participated:
In your opinion, say someone does not meet these requires, should a new easier process of impeachment be involved for the President? Should it be easier to "impeach" ill-acting lower level authorities as well?



I am from the country where the most powerful political figure can be booted by the parliament basically at any time. If the parliament thinks the person doesn't do a good job the head of state can/should be booted out. Especially if the people-polls agree as well. Although the parliament is choosing the person as well so if you are booted out of the office that means you have lost the support of someone. However people have the formal right to request that the parliament is suspended and that there are snap elections for it. Therefore the real power is formally in the people at this point of our history.



The similar should be for the lower level, if there are concrete arguments that there is a problems with the person they should be replaced. No one's life depends on being a professional politician.
 

ceecee

Coolatta® Enjoyer
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
15,925
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
For those who have participated:
In your opinion, say someone does not meet these requires, should a new easier process of impeachment be involved for the President? Should it be easier to "impeach" ill-acting lower level authorities as well?

No. If someone doesn't meet these requirements they shouldn't be nominated to begin with. They shouldn't be running to begin with. But as far as removal, for high or low level authorities, that's on the parties themselves. Here's what I mean.

Disgraced former Congressman Duncan Hunter sentenced to 11 months in prison - CBS News

This guy was indited for conspiracy, wire fraud, and violating campaign finance laws but allowed to remain representing his district for months.He should have been suspended until the outcome, just like any other person in any other job would be. Removed from committees immediately. I'm using him as one of the better examples but there are all kinds of examples. Republicans and Democrats are nearly identical disgusting corporate and wealthy donor servants, with a very few exceptions. So I don't expect the obvious changes that are needed until there are more of the exceptions.
 

Red Memories

Haunted Echoes
Joined
Jun 3, 2017
Messages
6,280
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
215
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
No. If someone doesn't meet these requirements they shouldn't be nominated to begin with. They shouldn't be running to begin with. But as far as removal, for high or low level authorities, that's on the parties themselves. Here's what I mean.

Disgraced former Congressman Duncan Hunter sentenced to 11 months in prison - CBS News

This guy was indited for conspiracy, wire fraud, and violating campaign finance laws but allowed to remain representing his district for months.He should have been suspended until the outcome, just like any other person in any other job would be. Removed from committees immediately. I'm using him as one of the better examples but there are all kinds of examples. Republicans and Democrats are nearly identical disgusting corporate and wealthy donor servants, with a very few exceptions. So I don't expect the obvious changes that are needed until there are more of the exceptions.

That seems like a fair move. I always wonder since we have to go through such rigorous background checks to get a good job, how come it seems these politicians can do things and never be held accountable? And if it arises during the campaign, as said, a suspension until a verdict would be justified. That is fair for everyone. Of course if you put that into play, I don't think we would have Trump OR Hillary...which probably would've left us a better vote anyway...
 

ceecee

Coolatta® Enjoyer
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
15,925
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Victor Orban is way ahead of you. Great leader, lovely country, Hungary. Everybody says so. You should see his ratings!

Victor Orban is an authoritarian nationalist but Trump is trying to do exactly the same things here.

DOJ Wants to Suspend Constitutional Rights for Coronavirus Emergency - Rolling Stone

My argument about the US senate is not as crazy (I thought it was when I first heard the idea too) as it might look and it's been proposed for some time.

Abolish the Senate
 

The Cat

Just a Magic Cat who hangs out at the Crossroads.
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
23,767
That seems like a fair move. I always wonder since we have to go through such rigorous background checks to get a good job, how come it seems these politicians can do things and never be held accountable? And if it arises during the campaign, as said, a suspension until a verdict would be justified. That is fair for everyone. Of course if you put that into play, I don't think we would have Trump OR Hillary...which probably would've left us a better vote anyway...

IME there's a disconnect between celebrity and accountability.:shrug:
 
Top