on politics...
Jan. 4th, 2008 11:01 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fleaI have been thinking about what I would ask the presidential candidates, if I found myself with the opportunity to conduct one-on-one job interviews with them. My big question would be ye olde, "What is your management style?"
We see a lot in the press about likeability. I 'like' Obama, I don't 'like' Clinton, everyone seems to 'like' Huckabee, the press 'likes' McCain. But while I do like some candidates more than others, I hope it doesn't influence my actual voting much. (I realize that not all US voters are analytical like me, of course.)
We also see some comments in the press, and in those online quizzes that tell you who you should vote for, about policy positions. Nobody jibes exactly with my positions, and it feels to me like the differences between, say, Edwards, Clinton and Obama are miniscule.
What I want in a president is, first, someone whose basic stance I agree with. This matters a lot when it comes to things like Supreme Court Appointees and the power to appoint Cabinet ministers, conduct foreign policy, etc - the areas where the president has the most direct power. But second, I want someone who is intelligent and willing to think about decisions and their impacts, and is a good manager, able to delegate to good people when necessary, handle crises coolly and without being an asshat.
So I think if I had to vote for a Republican (which I don't, and I won't), I might well vote for Romney. I may like him least of the Republican candidates; I don't think he actually HAS any values, for example, and frankly I like someone with honest values that I disagree with wholeheartedly (Huckabee, McCain on many issues) much more as a person than someone who twists in the wind the way he does. But he does seem to have a high level of managerial competence (Massachusettians can correct me if I'm wrong). One could do worse (Rudy Giuliani, I'm looking at you.)
I don't have a firm handle on the managerial skills on the Democratic side, except that I know that much as my personal values jibe with Kucinich's, he was an absolute disaster as mayor of Cleveland (where mr. flea grew up), so even if he were electable I wouldn't be in his camp. I am not wild about Hillary Clinton's managerial skills; we saw plenty during Bill Clinton's years in office and one of my major complaints about the Bill Clinton presidency was the managerial incompetence that resulted in stupid time-wasting instead of accomplishing policy. I don't know much of anything about how Edwards or Obama actually run things when they are in charge of things; as senators and campaigners both have certainly had some experience managing things, and I haven't heard much about major screwups by either, but you just don't know.
I hope this doesn't sound dumb; I've never studied government, and I'm no political junkie. Feel free to correct any errors of assumption I've made.
We see a lot in the press about likeability. I 'like' Obama, I don't 'like' Clinton, everyone seems to 'like' Huckabee, the press 'likes' McCain. But while I do like some candidates more than others, I hope it doesn't influence my actual voting much. (I realize that not all US voters are analytical like me, of course.)
We also see some comments in the press, and in those online quizzes that tell you who you should vote for, about policy positions. Nobody jibes exactly with my positions, and it feels to me like the differences between, say, Edwards, Clinton and Obama are miniscule.
What I want in a president is, first, someone whose basic stance I agree with. This matters a lot when it comes to things like Supreme Court Appointees and the power to appoint Cabinet ministers, conduct foreign policy, etc - the areas where the president has the most direct power. But second, I want someone who is intelligent and willing to think about decisions and their impacts, and is a good manager, able to delegate to good people when necessary, handle crises coolly and without being an asshat.
So I think if I had to vote for a Republican (which I don't, and I won't), I might well vote for Romney. I may like him least of the Republican candidates; I don't think he actually HAS any values, for example, and frankly I like someone with honest values that I disagree with wholeheartedly (Huckabee, McCain on many issues) much more as a person than someone who twists in the wind the way he does. But he does seem to have a high level of managerial competence (Massachusettians can correct me if I'm wrong). One could do worse (Rudy Giuliani, I'm looking at you.)
I don't have a firm handle on the managerial skills on the Democratic side, except that I know that much as my personal values jibe with Kucinich's, he was an absolute disaster as mayor of Cleveland (where mr. flea grew up), so even if he were electable I wouldn't be in his camp. I am not wild about Hillary Clinton's managerial skills; we saw plenty during Bill Clinton's years in office and one of my major complaints about the Bill Clinton presidency was the managerial incompetence that resulted in stupid time-wasting instead of accomplishing policy. I don't know much of anything about how Edwards or Obama actually run things when they are in charge of things; as senators and campaigners both have certainly had some experience managing things, and I haven't heard much about major screwups by either, but you just don't know.
I hope this doesn't sound dumb; I've never studied government, and I'm no political junkie. Feel free to correct any errors of assumption I've made.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-01-05 06:51 pm (UTC)I think that a lot of the problem is the word "flip-flop". It's so catchy and negative, that if an opponent attaches it to someone, it must be horrible.
I've been really bad at keeping up with their work, but I think that the Rockridge Institute is working on issues related to words like this.
Unfortunately, they're not working on getting rid of this type of thinking, which may not even be possible, but with using it for liberals as it has been used so effectively in the last thirty years for, well, I don't want to say for conservatives, but for Republicans.
How's that for a run-on sentence!