Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie89
Yeah the argument is basically 'which one is worse?' not which one is best... probably shouldn't be the case considering the job they're going for!
|
It's partially the public's fault. People want to vote for a hero who will play Chuck Norris to our enemies abroad, have God-like focus on the issues, solve all arguments with a pen stroke and basically be the Pokemon Master of DC.
Few people also vote in primaries which means we are stuck with the same "safe" choices over and over again... except the ppl who vote in them don't vote on steady options now... they vote based on rhetoric/desire to reform (wildcard candidates).
We can have a reasonably good president to run the country if our expectations were more realistic and we looked at people's record, not how charismatic they are on TV. We also put
too much pressure on such a person to solve the nation's issues when it
should involve the entire nation/government. Also who would want that job coupled with all the scandals, unfair scrutiny and ridiculous rhetoric going around?... oh yeah, people who are power hungry and are obsessed with fame. That attracts the worst kind of candidate.