I have wanted to discuss this idea with others, that there is no way just anyone can be President. My reasons for concluding this is watching the news coverage this election season and noticing that, at the get-go, very few of the official candidates got "face time" on the air.

McCain, Obama, Clinton and a few lesser folks got a lot of time out there in the MSM, but I cannot tell you how many times I have asked people what they thought of (or if they were disappointed about the loss in the primaries of) Kucinich or Paul, only to be asked, "Who???"

These last two, seeming to me to have the closest to true American values, with the Constitution and Bill of Rights firmly set as the centerpiece of their philosophy, were all but shunned.

So given this, could you win an election as President? Anyone you know personally? (I'm not talking about whether you are qualified, let's presume you were...)

My contention is that no one but those the MSM is instructed to fawn over have a snowball's chance in a fiery pit.

Your thoughts, and why?

EDIT: for typos.

[edit on 8/22/2008 by Amaterasu]

I have to say, it is HIGHLY doubtful that anyone can become president.

It comes off a facetious to say it, but if you're not rich, and you are not a member of the upper class in the community, there's no way you can become president of our country. That's not even considering the current situation where you MUST be accepted and promoted by a political 'party' just to get a chance to try.

Since media notoriety, and some degree of 'stardom' is needed before any party would even consider you, I would say that the simple answer is"'No."

I'm going with no. It's the biggest load of crap how all parents tell their kids they can be president someday. I suppose if maybe you were able to stay home and school your children full-time in the skills necessary for the role. Notice I didn't say "job" I said skills such as: critical thinking, deportment, communication, manipulation, subterfuge, sales, economics, social-climbing, public speaking, rhetoric, double-speak, etiquette, and on and on and on and on.

You would of course have to let extremely talented educators have control of the schooling. Without intense name recognition and an army of people raised in government standing behind them, your child would need to be exceptionally gifted intellectually to coerce the kind of money out of people required to be elected President. They would probably also need to be morally bankrupt.

While your child was being educated by these extremely talented educators you would also be required to follow your child around 24 hours a day to make sure they don't smoke pot, have homosexual sex (or any kind of pre-marital sex if possible) attend a protest, or get arrested. It would also be advisable if you enlisted your child in the military, during war-time even better. However, try to make sure they're accomplished enough to get a high-level officer position that won't see actual combat. Because no matter how honorably your child serves the opposition will always be able to find some way to make your child seem like a coward.

Average kids don't normally become President. Usually the kids who become President are from the same 200 or so families that grow them to be Presidents, Senators, Congresspeople.

[Edited: because I suck at the spelling & the grammar...]

[edit on 8/22/08 by Malynn]

I would have to bow my head down with shame and say "NO"


I remember being in grammar school learning about our political system, and it was definitely taught that any U.S. born citizen could be elected as president. Unfortunately as I grew up and learned the harsh realities of this world, and noticed that common talk during elections was the amount a candidate spends on his or her campaign. I don’t remember our forefathers wanting our society to be run by the richest, but the best candidate elected "BY THE PEOPLE...FOR THE PEOPLE". We all know how we are now.

I always told my friends as I grew up that when I hit the minimum age req. I would run for president... I still have a few years before I hit that mark, but I don’t have nearly the cash to even get noticed...

It sickens me when think of how many millions are spent on trash-talking ads against the other candidates.. We should have a rule where only ads supporting your positions on topics and why you should be elected are allowed. With the number of opponent bashing ads outnumber the non, I don’t know if the candidates would have many ads if this rule were in effect.

Well, so far, we have a 4 to one assessment that it is untrue that "anyone" (and that means all who fall under the delimitations of the Constitution) can be President.

Andrew... I can assure you that Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul were just as avid in their efforts (and likely more so) than Clinton, Obama or McCain...yet even before it was a given who would be the candidate for each "Party" (each side of a counterfeit coin), the media gave them virtually no coverage, compared to those three and others such as Edwards, Huckabee, and the rest who were "conventional" in their rhetoric.

And there was even some condescension from the talking heads that I noted on the rare instances that these two men got any chance to speak in the MSM.

So if the "conventional" view is not espoused - the lines that those who control the media like to hear - can we say our elections are truly fair and that "anybody" can grow up to be President?

Or might we suspect that our system is controlled...?

EDIT to add:

You have to start somewhere...and every man who has ever been President has started as a normal man, just like you or I.

Well, now... That seems to be incorrect. 25 of our Presidents (at least) have been of the same bloodline as European royalty. Unless you are using "normal" in the sense of having two eyes, a nose and a mouth...

[edit on 8/23/2008 by Amaterasu]

The dream of being President is still alive in America, it's a difficult dream to achieve, but doable. It takes hard work, more than a little luck; like achieveing any dream.

exactly my point thank you.


you CAN become president. If you are willing to do the things it takes.

Some things people would call unethical
some people would call conniving and deceitful

you know - the things a politician does
but you CAN become president.

Just because someone has hopes and dreams that a president can come from a local McDonalds doesnt make it plausible. Its POSSIBLE, certainly not Plausible - unless that McDonalds employee makes some serious changes.

When you asked the question "Can ANYONE (US Citizen, Born & Raised) Be a president, the answer is most definatly yes.

Can ANYONE (Rich or Poor, prestigious or no) become president? The answer is NO.

Two questions - two different answers.

(edit: for chist's sake, I accidentally changed subject. Sorry, did not mean to. I'm tired and read subject all wrong. Going to bed now. Good night.)

Something that media does not control are CEO's of companies. That is because those people are required to use logic under threat of getting fired at will. Obviously, there are media sources available that centralize on dismantling logic of decisions. However, such media is not that popular.

But, now, would I want an offshore president into my own country? Well, no, not really. It has its advantages when people are required to prove themselves, but such just does not apply in a democratic election system. Basically what I mean is that there is no way to get a perfect outcome in a system dominated by a media that emphasizes on scandals. Nobody's perfect, it is only a matter of luck whether media discovers something or not.

So, what does this have to do with anything? Well, if you take a law away and anyone is able to become a president, you will also open yourself to exact same type of market CEO's are in. You can go into any country, but in this case it is all about biggest money. What are you going to do, if biggest money is in a country that is a _lot_ richer than yours? To be arnest, I do not believe any country to be a leader forever. That will change, eventually, when timeline long enough is taken into account. History has shown this already.

That.. It would allow a little control over a country at highest level.

[edit on 23/8/08 by rawsom]

[edit on 23/8/08 by rawsom]

[edit on 23/8/08 by rawsom]

Is an honest man at such a disadvantage in pursueing this most American of dreams? True, a candidate with few scruples is free to utilize whatever tactic he or she chooses. We've all seen it, time and time again...what a refreshing change of pace that would be.

However, isn't there an innate appeal, viseral even, of an honest and forthright man or woman dealing in Truth, Justice, and yes, the American Way? I submit that there is...

The trick, of course, is finding this honest and forthright individual...and getting him/her to set foot in the cesspit that is politics.

I choose to believe that that man/woman is out there...personally, I'd give that person my support, virtually unto death.

My guess is that all of the true honest and moral people would be smart enough to stay away from politics

Just a thought

Originally posted by seagull
Is an honest man at such a disadvantage in pursueing this most American of dreams? True, a candidate with few scruples is free to utilize whatever tactic he or she chooses. We've all seen it, time and time again...what a refreshing change of pace that would be.

Well... To be frank, I thought Dennis Kucinich exhibited such qualities. Ron Paul too. Where did that get them? Not even in debates sometimes, and generally ignored in the MSM. The media spent untold hours talking about, interviewing and otherwise pumping up awareness of other candidates, but Paul was the Rep red headed stepchild, and Kucinich was the Dem's. Nobody touched them.

However, isn't there an innate appeal, viseral even, of an honest and forthright man or woman dealing in Truth, Justice, and yes, the American Way? I submit that there is...

Oh I surely agree with you - but in order to have a visceral reaction to a candidate one has to both be aware of them and understand their goals. Neither Paul nor Kucinich were given a fair shake and is easily demonstrated by the fact that so many I tried to talk to during their efforts to win nomination (and shortly after they conceded - as well as now) asked, "Who?" when I brought them up.

No one asks, "Who?" when you mention Edwards, even. And surely no one asks that about McCain, Obama or Clinton. So something is very wrong when people who should know about ALL the candidates can easily recognize some of them and have never heard of some of the others who are, or at least should be, on equal footing in the media at the start of things.

So the media controls - and is actively controlling - who we even get a change to respond viscerally to.

The trick, of course, is finding this honest and forthright individual...and getting him/her to set foot in the cesspit that is politics.

The trick, it would seem, is more to get the media to give equal time to all candidates. They covered Clinton's push here and McCain's efforts there and Huckabee's doings over yonder and Edwards' plans hither and Obama's rally thence. But what Paul and Kucinich were doing...? Virtually not word one. Except the surprising donations Paul got long past the point where it was clear the Rep's were not having him.

I choose to believe that that man/woman is out there...personally, I'd give that person my support, virtually unto death.

I think we already had at least two, but the media don't allow people to take them seriously.

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
When you asked the question "Can ANYONE (US Citizen, Born & Raised) Be a president, the answer is most definatly yes.

Heh. This is a technicality. Sure, on paper, we all are eligible ("all" being those who fall into the Constitution's requirements). But that's really not what my question was addressing.

Can ANYONE (Rich or Poor, prestigious or no) become president? The answer is NO.

Well, see... That is my point in a nutshell. Unless you're "acceptable" to a small group of men, the rest of the country barely gets to hear your name - no matter how much money you can raise.

Two questions - two different answers.

No, not really. A first view of my question in a very narrow perspective and then a widening of the view which encompasses what I (thought I) was clearly asking.

[edit on 8/23/2008 by Amaterasu]

Originally posted by rawsom
Something that media does not control are CEO's of companies.

Ah, but many of the CEO's have an interest in media as well, the people who decide who is CEO of many companies are vested in the media, and especially for the multinationals... They're a rather tight-knit group anyway.

That is because those people are required to use logic under threat of getting fired at will. Obviously, there are media sources available that centralize on dismantling logic of decisions. However, such media is not that popular.

Logic is not the issue. Agendas are.

But, now, would I want an offshore president into my own country?

I don't believe this topic has anything to do with opening up the presidency to "fer'ners..." [smile] It is about whether the average, born and raised in America, Joe has any hope of becoming President as we have been taught in school.

You have to willing to bend over backwards for the corporations if you want to become president.

If you think about it the president or congress dont make the laws the big businesses do. They pay off representatives, they support campaigns, they basically finance the governments actions.

So if you are out to stop bad business then you will never sit in the oval office. Thats just the way I see it atleast.