a reply to: interupt42
I agree with that. I saw the biography that you are referring to.
The problem for me is that I don't think any of these people can deliver what they are promising. I'm a post democracy voter, which might be coining a
phrase. I don't believe what any politician says when they are campaigning, even though they themselves might believe it in the moment. Most of what
they "promise" to deliver and actually can deliver are really cosmetic sorts of things, as we saw in Justin Trudeau's case in Canada, when he
appointed a cabinet that was 50/50 male and female.
I'm no fan of Trudeau. I think he has bamboozled people, but he hasn't made a mistake in principle because, even if one isn't the most talented person
available for a particular job, a person with enough talent
and enough grit
will grow into the job. If not, at cabinet level, they are
easily replaced most of the time anyway. If they are good enough, the job itself will make them better.
I think Trump is good enough and I think the presidency is the sort of job that will keep him in line. I don't think he is the kind of guy who will
use the position to help turn all of his cronies into billionaires. That, to me, would be the only danger from a person like him. In places like
Mexico and also, historically, in the United States gangs of families cooperated to game the system. I don't think Trump operates that way. I might be
wrong. Croneyism was something that was missing from the Trump biography.
I don't think he likes people that much. I don't think he wants his friends to be billionaires.
I think any of the candidates could be a good President but I don't think any of the candidates has anywhere near Trump's drive. Their policies don't
matter that much to me. I don't think any President can really dominate issues
anymore. They are all boxed in by reality, but if any candidate
has the sort of wrestling holds needed for the job, that person is Trump, I think. He's a bet I would be willing to make.
A lot of the candidates, including Trump, said that they would not raise the minimum wage. That is just another way of saying to a large mass of the
work force, who vote
, "You are going to take a cut in pay."
It is what it is thanks to rising costs of living. Unfortunately it also
says, "As President, I am going to push for the reinvigoration of the labor movement in the United States."
That's a headache that none of
these people want, but that's reality. That is an example of how reality boxes candidates in on an issue.
That is a quagmire that a smart candidate should want to avoid. Raising the minimum hourly wage is an easy way to do it. I disagree with Trump's
stance on this, but he is not alone. The minimum wage cannot be a make or break issue for anybody's economic policy, particularly Trump's. If it is,
then America really is in big trouble. For any of these candidates, minimum wage should be a piffling issue.
I would say, if I were Trump, "We'll look at raising the minimum wage in the context of the general health of the economy and if my ideas work,
raising the minimum wage will be easy for businesses across the country to do."
As an outsider, I think it is time for the Republican Party to rediscover noblesse oblige
, the notion that with great power comes great
responsibility for the powerless. It is time to crapcan "greed is good".
edit on 11-11-2015 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)