OT: Looks like McCain's cleaning up

[ThudMaker]

So you equate being a good public speaker and debater with the makings of a good president?

Being able to effectively communicate where you would like to lead the country is generally an acceptable and significant part of leadership. That's not just my opinion. People don't want to follow a leader who doesn't know where they are going or can't communicate that they know where they are going.

[Kindness]

+1 I don't really see anything overall that's that bad except for in political debates about how bad things are in an effort to get elected or tarnish the other side. Our "bad" is pretty damm good if you look at it historically.

 

 

That's my thought, but I'm not very educated and informed on the topics. I'm fairly apathetic. It's just not my thing. If I looked around and was concerned by what I saw I'd perk up a bit, but I'm pretty content as it is.

[Emprov]

True. However, it is not the end all be all requirement. Hillary can communcate just fine, but I personally think she would be the worst thing that could happen to this country so far as a president goes.

 

I don't think that Thud was saying that it was the single most defining attribute, it certainly is important though -- you have to admit that.

[Jugghaid]

+1 I don't really see anything overall that's that bad except for in political debates about how bad things are in an effort to get elected or tarnish the other side. Our "bad" is pretty damm good if you look at it historically.

 

 

True. comparitively we are still in great shape.

 

But I'd like to keep it that way, or even improve upon it and lowering the bar is not the direction to go, and it seems that we do it a little more every year.

[Emprov]

+1 I don't really see anything overall that's that bad except for in political debates about how bad things are in an effort to get elected or tarnish the other side. Our "bad" is pretty damm good if you look at it historically.

 

Ya but, you look at the state of the dollar, the fact that oil has just seen a huge jump in price (Russia and Mr. Chavez both getting boatloads of cash now), and the international perception of the US and it's easy to see how our "bad" can get a lot worse in no time flat.

[Jugghaid]

Being able to effectively communicate where you would like to lead the country is generally an acceptable and significant part of leadership. That's not just my opinion. People don't want to follow a leader who doesn't know where they are going or can't communicate that they know where they are going.

And that is what a good cabinet, staff and press secretary are for. GW is a perfect example of that. He stumbles over his own words all the time. But he's gotten better over time.

The public speaking part is fixable. The morality and message and honesty and direction are really not. and a good leader doesn't neccesarily equate into "good for the country". There are hundreds of examples of people with great leadership and speaking skills (great orators ) leading their people down the wrong path in history.

[lug]

Ya but, you look at the state of the dollar, the fact that oil has just seen a huge jump in price (Russia and Mr. Chavez both getting boatloads of cash now), and the international perception of the US and it's easy to see how our "bad" can get a lot worse in no time flat.

Domestic Inflation vs. income is the mark to measure by and we've outrun it by a good margin. If the dollar falls overseas yet we still pay a less percent of our incomes for the same goods, it indicates overseas is doing much better and we are doing no worse. Remember there is no such thing as zero gain except in politics.

[ThudMaker]

I don't think that Thud was saying that it was the single most defining attribute, it certainly is important though -- you have to admit that.

Correct. It is very important. I rate effective communicator equal to where they stand on the issues. Obama is an effective communicator, but his stances are not good.

[lug]

And that is what a good cabinet, staff and press secretary are for. GW is a perfect example of that. He stumbles over his own words all the time. But he's gotten better over time. The public speaking part is fixable. The morality and message and honesty and direction are really not. and a good leader doesn't neccesarily equate into "good for the country". There are hundreds of examples of people with great leadership and speaking skills (great orators ) leading their people down the wrong path in history.

....get's ready to invoke Godwin's law

[ThudMaker]

And that is what a good cabinet, staff and press secretary are for. GW is a perfect example of that. He stumbles over his own words all the time. But he's gotten better over time. The public speaking part is fixable. The morality and message and honesty and direction are really not. and a good leader doesn't neccesarily equate into "good for the country". There are hundreds of examples of people with great leadership and speaking skills (great orators ) leading their people down the wrong path in history.

George Bush is completely ineffective as a leader. If you think his cabinet has done a great job, I would have to disagree with you.

[Emprov]

The public speaking part is fixable.

 

A poor public speaker is not going to get elected.

 

My wife got a chance to see W when he was at Cisco about a year and a half ago. She was completely impressed with how he articulated his thoughts and how effective he was at vision casting. Then, to hear him and the comments about him later that night on the news, my wife said that it was like she was at a completely different function. He's nowhere near as bad as the press makes him out to be. If there were cameras on us 24/7, I'm sure that we'd be made to look much worse than even he does.

[countrybass]

[rant]




3. Calling illegal aliens "Undocument Workers" is like calling a drug dealer an "Unlicensed Pharmacist".

[lug]

George Bush is completely ineffective as a leader.

You might want to rethink that position.

[ThudMaker]

A poor public speaker is not going to get elected. My wife got a chance to see W when he was at Cisco about a year and a half ago. She was completely impressed with how he articulated his thoughts and how effective he was at vision casting. Then, to hear him and the comments about him later that night on the news, my wife said that it was like she was at a completely different function. He's nowhere near as bad as the press makes him out to be. If there were cameras on us 24/7, I'm sure that we'd be made to look much worse than even he does.

Yep. He's very personable and a nice speaker. The press has made him out to be something different and his handlers have kept him hidden as much as possible. That hasn't gotten it done and a huge reason for his poor approval ratings.

[Emprov]

Domestic Inflation vs. income is the mark to measure by and we've outrun it by a good margin. If the dollar falls overseas yet we still pay a less percent of our incomes for the same goods, it indicates overseas is doing much better and we are doing no worse. Remember there is no such thing as zero gain except in politics.

You're missing the point. For years, Russia could not afford to build subs, tanks and MIGS. And, by extension, China was not able to buy parts for tanks and MIGS. Now, Russia has cash again and China now has a pretty sweet deal going with Chavez. May be concern about nothing but it makes me go "hmmmm".

[ThudMaker]

You might want to rethink that position.

Nope. There's a difference between leadership and effective campaigning. He's run effective campaigns. Do I personally think he's done a great job with what he had handed to him by Slickmeister? You betcha. He has low approval ratings because he just hasn't communicated with the American people. With the job he has done over 8 years with positive growth (Except for now. Same thing happened with Clinton) and finding his US Grant in General Petraeus, his approval ratings should be significantly higher. Folks can blame the press all they want, but this is one leadership area where it's all Bush's fault.

[Jugghaid]

George Bush is completely ineffective as a leader. If you think his cabinet has done a great job, I would have to disagree with you.

Yet, he not only got elected, he got re-elected after what many would consider a very poor first term.


Yeah...........


Dubya is a lot of things, but an ineffective leader is not one of them. He's gotten 95% of what he wanted to accomplish done.

[lug]

Nope. There's a difference between leadership and effective campaigning. He's run effective campaigns. Do I personally think he's done a great job with what he had handed to him by Slickmeister? You betcha. He has low approval ratings because he just hasn't communicated with the American people. With the job he has done over 8 years with positive growth (Except for now. Same thing happened with Clinton) and finding his US Grant in General Petraeus, his approval ratings should be significantly higher. Folks can blame the press all they want, but this is one leadership area where it's all Bush's fault.

 

 

I think we are agreeing here.

[lug]

Yet, he not only got elected, he got re-elected after what many would consider a very poor first term. Yeah........... Dubya is a lot of things, but an ineffective leader is not one of them. He's gotten 95% of what he wanted to accomplish done.

Yep. He's evil like the bad guys from Captain Planet, not ineffective like Jimmy Carter.

[ThudMaker]

Yet, he not only got elected, he got re-elected after what many would consider a very poor first term. Yeah........... Dubya is a lot of things, but an ineffective leader is not one of them. He's gotten 95% of what he wanted to accomplish done.

That's not leadership. That's campaigning. He swiftboated Kerry right out of the race. Either way, it's not leadership.

[Jugghaid]

Yep. He's evil like the bad guys from Captain Planet, not ineffective like Jimmy Carter.

He's not a bad guy. He simply doesn't give a {censored} about approval ratings at this point. He's not running for anything. Popularity /= effectiveness.

[Jugghaid]

That's not leadership. That's campaigning. He swiftboated Kerry right out of the race. Either way, it's not leadership.

 

 

and look at what he has done while he has been in office. He has basically accomplished whatever he wanted to accomplish. That is leadership. At the cost of popularity. Doing the right thing and doing the popluar thing are not always one and the same. He's done a bit of both. This stimulus package is a perfect example, but he wanted it as much as the Dems.

 

People who think GW is stupid or inneffective really haven't been paying close attention. I would have to say he is one of the most effective presidents we have had in a long time. You may not agree with what he has accomplished, but by god, he got it accomplished.

[Kindness]

People who think GW is stupid or inneffective really haven't been paying close attention. I would have to say he is one of the most effective presidents we have had in a long time. You may not agree with what he has accomplished, but by god, he got it accomplished.

 

 

Exactly.

[ThudMaker]

and look at what he has done while he has been in office. He has basically accomplished whatever he wanted to accomplish. That is leadership. At the cost of popularity. Doing the right thing and doing the popluar thing are not always one and the same. He's done a bit of both. This stimulus package is a perfect example, but he wanted it as much as the Dems. People who think GW is stupid or inneffective really haven't been paying close attention. I would have to say he is one of the most effective presidents we have had in a long time. You may not agree with what he has accomplished, but by god, he got it accomplished.

Ronald Reagan was superior to George W Bush. Reagan was an effective communicator enough that he received quite a few votes from Democrats. The same can not be said of George W. Bush. He's gotten a lot of things through. How popular was Reagan? How popular is Bush? How divided was the nation when Reagan left office as opposed to the mood as Bush leaves office? How did the world look as Reagan left office? How does the world look as Bush is leaving office? Big difference. If he was an effective communicator those marks all around would be significantly higher. Accomplishing what Bush wanted to accomplish with an approval rating in the low 30's doesn't demonstrate leadership. It demonstrates weak opposition. And just as an FYI, I don't believe I've stated that I disagree with what he's accomplished.

[lug]

He's not a bad guy. He simply doesn't give a {censored} about approval ratings at this point. He's not running for anything. Popularity /= effectiveness.

I really just wanted a pat on the back for the Jimmy Carter reference.