4 ms·
This sounds logical and hopeful, but even a casual survey of the current lot of political leaders on all sides is very disappointing. Donald Trump, Joe Biden, K
by cudgy 4y ago
This sounds logical and hopeful, but even a casual survey of the current lot of political leaders on all sides is very disappointing. Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, George Bush, Barak Obama, Pete Buttigieg, AOC, and even the once heralded Bernie Sanders (just to name a few) have turned out to be massive failures and disappointments.
- hotpotamus 4y agoAre there political leaders you feel were not disappointing?
- cudgy 4y agoVery few come to mind actually. I’ll mention a few and accept the resulting criticism ;) 2016 version of Bernie Sanders; Jimmy Carter; Dennis Kucinich; and almost any politician willing to stand up against needless wars, as avoiding war is a top priority for me.
- hotpotamus 4y agoWell, I don't know that it's much of a criticism, but I do note which way all those people lean politically. Mostly I just think that the modern world is ungovernable, but then again, I'm not really the optimistic type.
- cudgy 4y agoWhat way do you think they lean politically? Many of them would no longer be considered modern Democrats. For example, 2016 Bernie was for strong borders, avoiding unnecessary war, and breaking away from trade agreements that were unfavorable to American workers. Modern Bernie votes to fund a war in Ukraine and no longer cares about securing the border. The Democratic party of today is socially far more left, but their foreign policy, free speech stances, and economic agenda resembles the old (pre-Trump grenade) Republican party. Weird times.
- 6510 4y agoWhat terrifies me is what happens after a truly competent leader leaves. A competent system would be preferable.
- OneLeggedCat 4y agoWe haven't had an honest president since Carter, and we haven't had a good president since Eisenhower. The math and process of our U.S. electoral system guarantees poor results.
- sharemywin 4y agoI wonder if they're reputations would have stood up to the media scrutiny of today.
- OneLeggedCat 4y agoProbably they actually would. But neither of them would get their party's nominations today.
- huijzer 4y agoI read one of Eisenhower’s biographies and he actually had some problems with the press especially thanks to Montgomery. At the same time, he was also one of the first US presidents to recognise that news can be leveraged to spread your message. Unlike earlier presidents, Eisenhower actually cooperated with the press and gave them news directly. That together with him winning a major war for America makes me suspect that his reputation would have also stood up with the media scrutiny of today. Assuming that there even is more scrutiny today? Maybe because there are more journalists nowadays so yes it could be
- archagon 4y agoYou think Obama was dishonest?
- OneLeggedCat 4y agoYes, definitely. I was infuriated by many of W's policies regarding war and domestic spying, and Obama said he would stop those abuses, but instead continued on as was, or worse.
- drewcoo 4y agoI think generals have an important advantage in honesty. No matter how political an officer's life is, it pales in comparison to the amount of lies needed to be a career politician. Grant was also known for his unlacquered honesty. And for his desire to serve the nation. Whereas Lincoln changed opinions when favorable to him and was happy to suspend rule of law for the same reason.
- vagrantJin 4y ago> massive failures and disappointments. Compared to whom and what? What was the standard to which you decided they should be measured against that led to your conclusion?