WWTBAM Bored

Skoop brought up an interesting point in our little discussion about the candidates and health care.

I figure we get along despite bad leadership sometimes. If we get good leadership now and then, that's a plus. And then, as is obvious in this thread, we all have different ideas about what constitutes good leadership. I am willing to go along with some ideas even if I don't agree with them, if I think they will work out best for the larger group. But most folks don't vote that way.

And, for the most part, I would go along with that. I think this country needs a strong leader. But, what constitutes a good leader. One who is willing to take us down the road to ruin because he/she thinks it's the right way to go. Or, one that listens to the will of the people and takes his direction from those that put him in office - even if it means going against what he believes is the right way to go?

I would agree with any candidate provided my big three go in the same direction as theirs. 1) The Illegal Migration Problem; 2) Keeping the Homeland safe from Worldwide Terrorism; 3) Health Care. AFAIC, the other issues are secondary.

Sir_Galahad wrote:But, what constitutes a good leader. One who is willing to take us down the road to ruin because he/she thinks it's the right way to go. Or, one that listens to the will of the people and takes his direction from those that put him in office - even if it means going against what he believes is the right way to go?

Can it be a mix of both? I have great respect for leaders who are willing to do the unpopular thing for the right reasons. But a good leader must be willing to consider other schools of thought. I think a great leader would not look upon this as a concession.

I think what America needs is no leader, a direct democracy using the internet to vote on every issue.

Shade wrote:I think what America needs is no leader, a direct democracy using the internet to vote on every issue.

You're young, aren't you? --Bob

Shade wrote:I think what America needs is no leader, a direct democracy using the internet to vote on every issue.

That's a horrible idea.

Have you ever really looked around and noticed just how many idiots there are around us?

I mean, just look at how many vote Democratic.

Shade wrote:I think what America needs is no leader, a direct democracy using the internet to vote on every issue.

Do you have a mall near you? Better yet, a Wal-mart? If so, go one Saturday afternoon. Sit and watch everyone. Imagine those people are making the decisions on how things should be done.

Bob78164 wrote:

Shade wrote:I think what America needs is no leader, a direct democracy using the internet to vote on every issue.

You're young, aren't you? --Bob

Yup, I'm 18

Shade wrote:I think what America needs is no leader, a direct democracy using the internet to vote on every issue.

What a truly frightening thought. I would rather live in Iran if that were to ever come to be. The scary thing is, there are many people that get elected that think that's a good idea.

Fine, maybe it isn't such a great idea.

Shade wrote:I think what America needs is no leader, a direct democracy using the internet to vote on every issue.

Think of how dumb the average person is. Now realize that half of everyone else is dumber.

Only about 50% of the population votes, it stands to reason that those are the ones who care about what happens to America, follows politics to some extent and, moderatly educated. Those are the people who would probably vote in the new "Direct Democracy Online System".

marrymeflyfree wrote:Can it be a mix of both? I have great respect for leaders who are willing to do the unpopular thing for the right reasons. But a good leader must be willing to consider other schools of thought. I think a great leader would not look upon this as a concession.

Rec!!!

I wholeheartedly agree - someone who blindly follows "the will of the people" is as bad as someone who stubbornly refuses to heed any opinions but his/her own. A great leader knows when it is time to listen and time to proceed.

Shade wrote:

I think what America needs is no leader, a direct democracy using the internet to vote on every issue.

No, thank you, jury pools give me nightmares, this is even scarier.

I am feeling pretty apathetic about everyone running for office. The only good thing about the election is that Bush isn't allowed to run again.

PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:I am feeling pretty apathetic about everyone running for office.

Good news! There is a new candidate for office I think almost everyone can appreciate and support!


Best Person Running?

Even a quasi-democracy would be different from the system this country has always used - you don't vote for a candidate, you vote in Presidential Electors, who meet 41 days after elections and cast their electoral ballots. In theory, they follow the party ticket, but they aren't bound to it (see faithless electors). Our founding fathers also feared the great unwashed, and the presumption of "one man, one vote" is a myth