Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
What does it take apart from lots of money; to become president of the USA ?
Topic Started: Dec 15 2007, 10:32 PM (476 Views)
STC
Member Avatar
Commodore
Data's Cat's Sister
Dec 19 2007, 11:13 PM
Admiralbill_gomec
Dec 19 2007, 11:05 PM
Possibly, but considering the choices from the other side, the supposed disillusionment might not be a big deal. After all, there was supposed to be this vast sea of disillusionment back in 2004, but Bush won re-election pretty handily (by the largest margin since his father's time). By the way, the word "regime" is viewed quite negatively in this country.


Oh sorry I didn't realise. I didn't mean anything by that.

Yeah you never can tell. Everyone was saying in our last election that everyone was so anti Labour and that they would lose a huge number of seats.

In the end they didn't do too badly. Results did not match up to the polls as I recall.

That's very true DCS. Though I think in the case of the last UK General Election, Labour, and Blair, held on because the Conservative Party were still very weak. However, now that they are re-invigorated under David Cameron's leadership, Labour may not be so fortunate next time...

... which actually then comes back to your original point. People here are, as you say disillusioned with Labour, the 'spin', and increasingly the corruption. I do genuinely think that Gordon Brown is trying to distance himself from the poorer aspects of Blairs government but, by association and general disillusionment, he may be a political victim of circumstance and time in the manner you suggest.

Admiralbill_gomec
 
By the way, the word "regime" is viewed quite negatively in this country.


I fell foul of the differing meaning of that word early on when I came here, in that it was seen as something else. Language is so different isn't it, even between two countries who supposedly speak the same language! :lol:

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ds9074
Member Avatar
Admiral
Quote:
 
I do genuinely think that Gordon Brown is trying to distance himself from the poorer aspects of Blairs government

Then his moral compass broke and now he is just going round and round in circles, totally lost.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
STC
Member Avatar
Commodore
ds9074
Dec 20 2007, 01:00 AM
Quote:
 
I do genuinely think that Gordon Brown is trying to distance himself from the poorer aspects of Blairs government

Then his moral compass broke and now he is just going round and round in circles, totally lost.


His 'moral compass broke' :chin: .

What makes you say that DS?

:)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
Resources have a lot to do with a person's ability to be elected.

Not all Presidents were born into wealthy families though.

I do think those born into wealthy political families have more connections and resources available to them.

Whether they use those resources to the best of their ability is another story.

In theory though, anyone who is naturally born here in the US can become President.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ds9074
Member Avatar
Admiral
STC
Dec 20 2007, 02:13 AM
ds9074
Dec 20 2007, 01:00 AM
Quote:
 
I do genuinely think that Gordon Brown is trying to distance himself from the poorer aspects of Blairs government

Then his moral compass broke and now he is just going round and round in circles, totally lost.


His 'moral compass broke' :chin: .

What makes you say that DS?

:)

Could be something to do with the blatent lying about why he called off the election that never was. Yes sure he would still have called it off if polls had shown a 100 seat Labour majority :rolleyes:

At his most recent press conference he was giving out mince pies. As I read on a blog makes a change from the normal load of pork pies we get at these conferences.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
Well it certainly doesn't require a good command of the English language. Money is a major factor though. It costs millions to run for a Congress seat let alone the Presidency. Either you have a lot of money or you know a lot of people with a lot of money.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Dr. Noah
Jan 2 2008, 10:32 PM
Well it certainly doesn't require a good command of the English language.

And I'm glad about that, even though it is purity certain I won’t be running for president any time soon, its nice to know that the people of this country won’t discount me anyway on such a shallow criteria based on my disability to possess a good command of the English language. Its one of the reasons I think the US is great, people are willing to over look such impairments and judge you on other more important criteria.

Should I take your statement to imply that you would judge me as less intelligent and incapable because I do not possess a good command of the English language?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
Like it or not Dan, good communication skills are an important part of leadership. If you expect people to follow you, you should be able to clearly articulate why. Maybe it is shallow, but people do judge you on the way you speak. No more shallow than judging people on their appearances (like "looking presidential") or whether or not they wear a flag pin on their jacket.

I understand that you may be sensitive about this issue, but I am not saying people who lack good communication skills are not intelligent, I am saying I think it's an important quality for leadership. There are many qualities that make for good leaders. Good leaders however need not have all of these.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Dr. Noah
Jan 4 2008, 05:37 PM
Like it or not Dan, good communication skills are an important part of leadership. If you expect people to follow you, you should be able to clearly articulate why. Maybe it is shallow, but people do judge you on the way you speak. No more shallow than judging people on their appearances (like "looking presidential") or whether or not they wear a flag pin on their jacket.

I understand that you may be sensitive about this issue, but I am not saying people who lack good communication skills are not intelligent, I am saying I think it's an important quality for leadership. There are many qualities that make for good leaders. Good leaders however need not have all of these.

Being brainy doesn't seem prerequisit either. Current incumbant is not what anyone would call a bright spark when it comes to smarts.

Oh my , I feel another poll coming on..... :blink:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Dr. Noah
Jan 4 2008, 02:37 AM
Like it or not Dan, good communication skills are an important part of leadership. If you expect people to follow you, you should be able to clearly articulate why. Maybe it is shallow, but people do judge you on the way you speak. No more shallow than judging people on their appearances (like "looking presidential") or whether or not they wear a flag pin on their jacket.

As I have learned in my MBA program on the topic of leadership "communication skills" do not end nor predicate on the speechifying ability of the leader. In fact these skills pall in comparison to the much more needed skills of listening and conversing. That is the number one rule that is tough about leadership, you can talk all day long but if you do not not connect its all worthless.

Judging a person by his appearance is also a bad way to judge a leader. You would have never had Lincoln, FDR, and JFK as president if you did that. And Obama would have never have gotten as far as he has in politics let alone being a real candidate for president.

These ARE shallow ways to judge a leader, and people should refrain from doing so. Especially if they wish to claim they are progressive and tolerant.


Quote:
 
I understand that you may be sensitive about this issue, but I am not saying people who lack good communication skills are not intelligent, I am saying I think it's an important quality for leadership.  There are many qualities that make for good leaders.  Good leaders however need not have all of these.


If this is true, why the need to pick one quality and berate it?

Also I am not “sensitive” about the issue. I have had to deal with it all my life I have come to the point where I must stand up for it because it is the right thing to do.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Dandandat
Jan 4 2008, 11:45 PM
Dr. Noah
Jan 4 2008, 02:37 AM
Like it or not Dan, good communication skills are an important part of leadership.  If you expect people to follow you, you should be able to clearly articulate why.  Maybe it is shallow, but people do judge you on the way you speak.  No more shallow than judging people on their appearances (like "looking presidential") or whether or not they wear a flag pin on their jacket.

As I have learned in my MBA program on the topic of leadership "communication skills" do not end nor predicate on the speechifying ability of the leader. In fact these skills pall in comparison to the much more needed skills of listening and conversing. That is the number one rule that is tough about leadership, you can talk all day long but if you do not not connect its all worthless.

Judging a person by his appearance is also a bad way to judge a leader. You would have never had Lincoln, FDR, and JFK as president if you did that. And Obama would have never have gotten as far as he has in politics let alone being a real candidate for president.

These ARE shallow ways to judge a leader, and people should refrain from doing so. Especially if they wish to claim they are progressive and tolerant.


Quote:
 
I understand that you may be sensitive about this issue, but I am not saying people who lack good communication skills are not intelligent, I am saying I think it's an important quality for leadership.  There are many qualities that make for good leaders.  Good leaders however need not have all of these.


If this is true, why the need to pick one quality and berate it?

Also I am not “sensitive” about the issue. I have had to deal with it all my life I have come to the point where I must stand up for it because it is the right thing to do.

Quote:
 
speechifying ability
:blink: :doh:

Is that a real word ?

don't you mean presentation skills and oration ability ?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
somerled
Jan 4 2008, 09:15 AM
Dandandat
Jan 4 2008, 11:45 PM
Dr. Noah
Jan 4 2008, 02:37 AM
Like it or not Dan, good communication skills are an important part of leadership.  If you expect people to follow you, you should be able to clearly articulate why.  Maybe it is shallow, but people do judge you on the way you speak.  No more shallow than judging people on their appearances (like "looking presidential") or whether or not they wear a flag pin on their jacket.

As I have learned in my MBA program on the topic of leadership "communication skills" do not end nor predicate on the speechifying ability of the leader. In fact these skills pall in comparison to the much more needed skills of listening and conversing. That is the number one rule that is tough about leadership, you can talk all day long but if you do not not connect its all worthless.

Judging a person by his appearance is also a bad way to judge a leader. You would have never had Lincoln, FDR, and JFK as president if you did that. And Obama would have never have gotten as far as he has in politics let alone being a real candidate for president.

These ARE shallow ways to judge a leader, and people should refrain from doing so. Especially if they wish to claim they are progressive and tolerant.


Quote:
 
I understand that you may be sensitive about this issue, but I am not saying people who lack good communication skills are not intelligent, I am saying I think it's an important quality for leadership.  There are many qualities that make for good leaders.  Good leaders however need not have all of these.


If this is true, why the need to pick one quality and berate it?

Also I am not “sensitive” about the issue. I have had to deal with it all my life I have come to the point where I must stand up for it because it is the right thing to do.

Quote:
 
speechifying ability
:blink: :doh:

Is that a real word ?

don't you mean presentation skills and oration ability ?

Somerled
 
Being brainy doesn't seem prerequisit either. Current incumbant is not what anyone would call a bright spark when it comes to smarts.


"Prerequisit" is not a word and neither is "incumbant". In addition your sentence structure is atrocious.

Edit - And one more thing. My six year old is aware that you are supposed to use a capital at the beginning of a sentence. You could learn from her Somerled.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Posted Image
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
somerled
Jan 4 2008, 09:15 AM
Dandandat
Jan 4 2008, 11:45 PM
Dr. Noah
Jan 4 2008, 02:37 AM
Like it or not Dan, good communication skills are an important part of leadership.  If you expect people to follow you, you should be able to clearly articulate why.  Maybe it is shallow, but people do judge you on the way you speak.  No more shallow than judging people on their appearances (like "looking presidential") or whether or not they wear a flag pin on their jacket.

As I have learned in my MBA program on the topic of leadership "communication skills" do not end nor predicate on the speechifying ability of the leader. In fact these skills pall in comparison to the much more needed skills of listening and conversing. That is the number one rule that is tough about leadership, you can talk all day long but if you do not not connect its all worthless.

Judging a person by his appearance is also a bad way to judge a leader. You would have never had Lincoln, FDR, and JFK as president if you did that. And Obama would have never have gotten as far as he has in politics let alone being a real candidate for president.

These ARE shallow ways to judge a leader, and people should refrain from doing so. Especially if they wish to claim they are progressive and tolerant.


Quote:
 
I understand that you may be sensitive about this issue, but I am not saying people who lack good communication skills are not intelligent, I am saying I think it's an important quality for leadership.  There are many qualities that make for good leaders.  Good leaders however need not have all of these.


If this is true, why the need to pick one quality and berate it?

Also I am not “sensitive” about the issue. I have had to deal with it all my life I have come to the point where I must stand up for it because it is the right thing to do.

Quote:
 
speechifying ability
:blink: :doh:

Is that a real word ?

don't you mean presentation skills and oration ability ?

http://www.answers.com/speechifying&r=67

and just in case

http://www.answers.com/ability+?cat=health
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus