Presidents and Cash

[Stormbringer]

The point of all that being what?

[fgalkin]

The point of all that being what?

Although Truman was not rich, he was certainly well-connected and had the backing of a political boss. As he got elected, and became FDR's yes-man in the Senate, he was then chosen to be his VP (again, to serve as a yes-man). An unimpressive political career, if you ask me. Fat chance Truman would have been elected on his own.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Stormbringer]

The point of all that being what?

Although Truman was not rich, he was certainly well-connected and had the backing of a political boss. As he got elected, and became FDR's yes-man in the Senate, he was then chosen to be his VP (again, to serve as a yes-man). An unimpressive political career, if you ask me. Fat chance Truman would have been elected on his own.

You realized that the chances of a total politcal unknown getting elected are the next best thing to nothing? There isn't a President in US history that ran and won as a total unknown.

The point is wealth and family connections are not prerequistes. One can start out and build a career. Truman did that, so for that matter did Nixon.

[Montcalm]

Politics is not for honest people,you need three things to be president or prime minister.
no1:you have to be realy realy rich.
no2:you need connection.
no3:you have to be a good lawyer..........i mean liar.

[fgalkin]

The point of all that being what?

Although Truman was not rich, he was certainly well-connected and had the backing of a political boss. As he got elected, and became FDR's yes-man in the Senate, he was then chosen to be his VP (again, to serve as a yes-man). An unimpressive political career, if you ask me. Fat chance Truman would have been elected on his own.

You realized that the chances of a total politcal unknown getting elected are the next best thing to nothing? There isn't a President in US history that ran and won as a total unknown.

The point is wealth and family connections are not prerequistes. One can start out and build a career. Truman did that, so for that matter did Nixon.

I'm saying that Truman wouldn't have been elected if he was running for president.

Nixon was supported by Billy Graham and the fundie movement.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Durandal]

If the only criticism you can come up with of Gore is his personality, then you don't have much ground to criticize.

On the contrary, a President must be capable of leading. Gore, whatever his policies, can't. That's something so many democrats don't understand these days, Bush's policies might be flawed but he leads. They just snipe at those who do.

Bush is good for telling Americans what they want to hear, but that's all. He gave a nice speech after September 11th, but all he does is make people feel better for a few days. Making people feel temporarily better about themselves doesn't create jobs like a good economic policy, and it doesn't improve America's worldwide image like good foreign policy. In other words, talk is cheap.

[Frank Hipper]

I don't believe Carter was especially wealthy. Had one of the highest IQs of any president, not that it helped him.....

[fgalkin]

I don't believe Carter was especially wealthy. Had one of the highest IQs of any president, not that it helped him.....

He, too was helped by Graham and his ilk. Get got pretty much all of the fundie votes.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Stormbringer]

Bush is good for telling Americans what they want to hear, but that's all. He gave a nice speech after September 11th, but all he does is make people feel better for a few days. Making people feel temporarily better about themselves doesn't create jobs like a good economic policy, and it doesn't improve America's worldwide image like good foreign policy. In other words, talk is cheap.

Yes it is. The thing is Bush is backing it with action, good or bad. Gore simply talked a lot but he never lead. Bush has even if it's a very bumpy road he's leading us down.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

I don't believe Carter was especially wealthy. Had one of the highest IQs of any president, not that it helped him.....

He, too was helped by Graham and his ilk. Get got pretty much all of the fundie votes.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Well, which modern-day presidents didn't get any help from the fundamentalist movement? I'm really not suprised that a lot of them are, as American voters love religous candidates.

[fgalkin]

I don't believe Carter was especially wealthy. Had one of the highest IQs of any president, not that it helped him.....

He, too was helped by Graham and his ilk. Get got pretty much all of the fundie votes.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Well, which modern-day presidents didn't get any help from the fundamentalist movement? I'm really not suprised that a lot of them are, as American voters love religous candidates.

One thing is being supported by fundies, another thing is being a born-again Christian and getting virtually EVERY SINGLE fundie vote.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Durandal]

Bush is good for telling Americans what they want to hear, but that's all. He gave a nice speech after September 11th, but all he does is make people feel better for a few days. Making people feel temporarily better about themselves doesn't create jobs like a good economic policy, and it doesn't improve America's worldwide image like good foreign policy. In other words, talk is cheap.

Yes it is. The thing is Bush is backing it with action, good or bad. Gore simply talked a lot but he never lead. Bush has even if it's a very bumpy road he's leading us down.

On the contrary, Gore is more than capable of taking the lead of a situation. He's taken a great number of initiatives in technology as well as in protecting the environment. Just because he probably wouldn't be leading the country into a war at this moment doesn't mean he lacks initiative.

[Stormbringer]

On the contrary, Gore is more than capable of taking the lead of a situation. He's taken a great number of initiatives in technology as well as in protecting the environment. Just because he probably wouldn't be leading the country into a war at this moment doesn't mean he lacks initiative.

"Taking initiatives" isn't leadership. It's a start but it's not leadership. Leadership is about setting goals and then going for them and following through. It's about leading people, some Gore just didn't do. His robot personality and calculated stance on everything simply didn't convince people to follow his policies.

[SirNitram]

Bush is good for telling Americans what they want to hear, but that's all. He gave a nice speech after September 11th, but all he does is make people feel better for a few days. Making people feel temporarily better about themselves doesn't create jobs like a good economic policy, and it doesn't improve America's worldwide image like good foreign policy. In other words, talk is cheap.

Yes it is. The thing is Bush is backing it with action, good or bad. Gore simply talked a lot but he never lead. Bush has even if it's a very bumpy road he's leading us down.

On the contrary, Gore is more than capable of taking the lead of a situation. He's taken a great number of initiatives in technology as well as in protecting the environment. Just because he probably wouldn't be leading the country into a war at this moment doesn't mean he lacks initiative.

The point is, as always, charisma. Gore, for all his wonderful qualities, lacked it. He was not a fundamentally likable guy, nor did his manner suggest 'leader'. This is a very, very real problem for anyone seeking a position like the Presidency, where public image is a great part of the job. It isn't enough to just have initiative and to do great things, you must make people want to join you in doing great things. Charisma is a massive part of being a leader, and sadly, Gore didn't have it.

[Darth Garden Gnome]

For everyone who thinks Gore is a robot all the time, you're definatley wrong. When he was interviewed by Good Morning America, or whatever, he was actually a very, very funny guy. He was great on SNL, too. Problem is he doesn't know how to carry his sense of humor over to his buisness life, and so he lacks charisma when hes performing politics. Too bad really, hes a funny guy if you get him on a talk show.

[Stormbringer]

For everyone who thinks Gore is a robot all the time, you're definatley wrong. When he was interviewed by Good Morning America, or whatever, he was actually a very, very funny guy. He was great on SNL, too. Problem is he doesn't know how to carry his sense of humor over to his buisness life, and so he lacks charisma when hes performing politics. Too bad really, hes a funny guy if you get him on a talk show.

He seems to be better one on one (or at least dealing with one person). But I've seen him speak and he's a cold fish. Even at a Democratic rally he had a hard time firing up the crowd. He simply can't lead.

[The Dark]

In order to disprove the theory that one must be rich and well-connected in order to be president in the modern era, one need only present an example of a recent president who did not fit that profile. Any takers?

What about LBJ? His father was a relatively poor farmer in Texas. He attended all public schools and became a schoolteacher. His political career began when he was secretary to a congressman. FDR met him through this job and nominated him to lead the Texan National Youth Administration. He ran for Congress based on that, and won. He then served in WWII until Roosevelt recalled all members of Congress from active service. He'd lost a Senate bid in 1941, but won in 1948 by 87 votes. In '53 he became head of the Democratic Party in the Senate, and was majority leader until he had a heart attack in '55. He was selected as Vice-President because the National Convention felt Kennedy was a better-known name. After Kennedy's death, he became President and won an election against Goldwater. I realize he wasn't initially selected, but that was due to Johnson only being well-known in the South.

[Durandal]

I guess it all boils down to what you'd rather see in a leader. The majority of the voting public seemed to agree with me, though.

However, while Gore may have lacked charisma and possessed intelligence, Bush doesn't come off as particularly charismatic or intelligent to me. A man who constantly reminds me that I'm more intelligent than he is because of his frequent abuses of the English language isn't exactly someone I'm going to have respect for or like. Then again, I guess he's charismatic in that, "Aw, look at him, isn't he cute?" kind of way.

Well come on! He looks like a chimp!

[Darth Garden Gnome]

Well come on! He looks like a chimp!

More like the guy from on the MAD magazines. All he needs is gap tooth.

C'mon, you know you wanna make fun of him too, even if he is your favorite choice for prez.

[Montcalm]

In order to disprove the theory that one must be rich and well-connected in order to be president in the modern era, one need only present an example of a recent president who did not fit that profile. Any takers?

What about LBJ? His father was a relatively poor farmer in Texas. He attended all public schools and became a schoolteacher. His political career began when he was secretary to a congressman. FDR met him through this job and nominated him to lead the Texan National Youth Administration. He ran for Congress based on that, and won. He then served in WWII until Roosevelt recalled all members of Congress from active service. He'd lost a Senate bid in 1941, but won in 1948 by 87 votes. In '53 he became head of the Democratic Party in the Senate, and was majority leader until he had a heart attack in '55. He was selected as Vice-President because the National Convention felt Kennedy was a better-known name. After Kennedy's death, he became President and won an election against Goldwater. I realize he wasn't initially selected, but that was due to Johnson only being well-known in the South.

LBJ got to be president the same way Clark did in Babylon 5 he had JFK killed

[Stormbringer]

I guess it all boils down to what you'd rather see in a leader. The majority of the voting public seemed to agree with me, though.

A narrow majority of the people that bother to vote.

However, while Gore may have lacked charisma and possessed intelligence, Bush doesn't come off as particularly charismatic or intelligent to me. A man who constantly reminds me that I'm more intelligent than he is because of his frequent abuses of the English language isn't exactly someone I'm going to have respect for or like. Then again, I guess he's charismatic in that, "Aw, look at him, isn't he cute?" kind of way.

Well come on! He looks like a chimp!

Bush is a shitty public speaker. That doesn't necessarilly translate to idiot.

The fact is he's lead. Not especially well but he's lead. Leadership isn't exactly charisma though it helps. Bush's got the ability to lead, Gore didn't.

[irishmick79]

You don't necessarily have to be rich to become president, but you absolutely have to be able to work your connections in order to get things done politically in America. As you develop a record of getting things done on a local level, it allows you to branch out and develop more connections that can help you elevate your position to higher levels. And these people didn't exactly have a rich donor drop out of the sky and say, "I like you kid, you're my guy." A lot of these connections are initially based on relationships that take a while to develop.