The picking of the 2016 U.S. president is a serious business. After June of 2016, and after I return from Italy, I will be volunteering with an established organization that is set up to encourage all potential voters to register, whether they are republicans, democrats, independents and /or green party members, so that their voices can count, for once.
It is incumbent upon all of us to become educated about the presidential candidates in order to make an informed decision. Why people vote for someone depends frequently on their own self interests. For example, if the voter is a strong gun advocate, this individual will most likely look for a candidate who reflects his/ her views. The same is true for someone who is in favor of stricter gun regulations. The best resource that I have found for information about the candidates with regards to their stances and policies can be found on a web site sponsored by a non partisan organization, League of Women Voters. (League of Women Voters | Making Democracy Work lwv.org)
The job of being our U.S. president is a tough one. Too frequently, it requires our leaders to make the best judgments from an array of limited bad options; to know who to listen to when they are surrounded by a host of sycophants offering competing suggestions based on their own hidden agendas. Over the past 2 decades, their are a number of examples on how our two Commanders-in-Chiefs made choices with far reaching negative outcomes because they listened to those who were simply wrong. What is worse, they have to sit back to observe in real time, the repercussions of their mistakes. Then their great achievements are minimized by all the detractors from those in the opposition party.
In my blog series, “The American Peoples are the Adults,” I will be referring to examples of when our presidents made poor choices based on acting on flawed advice from close trusted advisers, as well as hot topics that Americans care about, such as how to contain rising college costs.
I will share my thoughts on how I personally, arrived on my final choices. I anticipate that there will be folks who disagree with my method, but I welcome all those differing voices out there, who have their own ways.
When I am thinking about the election, I like to imagine me as the CEO of a company who is looking to hire the best person for a key position. Because I openly seek to surround myself with competent peoples with different world outlooks, I do not want someone who has a history of not working well with others with differing ideas, especially when they have no accomplishments to brag about during an interview.
I would want them to align their objectives with my organization’s mission statement, such as growing the business with innovations, new creations and great ideas; increasing revenues (the bottom line) while valuing our loyal employees because they are the ones providing exceptional products and services to our consumers. Thus, someone who could harm my company’s brand for excellence, by having a a different agenda such as a history for producing greater revenues by short cutting my employees and consumers well, need not apply.
I hire only the best who will be amply rewarded for taking action on great ideas. This requires someone who has a record for making sound, prudent judgments based on their seeking and reviewing input from all angles; the compilation of hard data, and then the taking of action. Therefore, no one need apply if they don’t have a track record of making quality executive judgment calls.
Finally, there would be zero tolerance for any improper sexual comments, any verbal abuse including name calling, any racist type comments which could result in a dysfunctional, toxic work environment.
As an after thought, it would be helpful if the job applicant is knowledgeable in an area that my company needs assistance, and who has developed connections to other “movers and shakers” in a similar industry.
Based on my above stated criteria, republicans Donald Trump, Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz would not get pass the company’s front door. Donald Trump’s verbal abuse of just about anyone who disagrees with him, is an automatic dis-qualifier. Senator Cruz has a well-deserved reputation for not playing well with others, and so he is not a viable applicant. Senator Rubio has worked in his current U.S. Senate seat for less than 4 years with mixed reviews. It appears that he has not shown up for key committee meetings for the majority time of his tenure. In addition, he is loosing in the polls to his main opponent, Donald Trump, in his State of Florida where he was a state senator for several years. This is not a good sign.
The current republican, Ohio Governor John Kasich meets my standards. And here is a quick snap shot of his background from his own web site:
“As Chairman of the U.S. House Budget Committee, John Kasich spearheaded the successful effort to balance the federal budget for the first time since man walked on the moon (He was a U.S. Congress representative from 1983-2000). As Governor (from 2010-present times) he closed Ohio’s $8 billion budget shortfall without raising taxes, turned the state’s 89-cent rainy day fund into a $2 billion surplus, cut taxes by $5 billion—the biggest tax cut of any state, and helped Ohioans create more than 300,000 private sector jobs in four years.”
Within his state of Ohio, he is a very popular governor who is expected to win in the upcoming primary elections. (This is not a given.) He is a governor who made the decision to serve the needs of his constituents over the republican party ideologues’ objections by expanding the medicaid option within his state. Also, he has an executive background when he worked in the private sector from 2001-2008, as a Managing Director of Lehman Brothers Investment Banking Division.
Within the democrat party and at first glance, Senator Bernie Sanders would not pass my test. I recall that he was the cog who held up a real chance to enact a bipartisan immigration reform bill in 2007, and he has no other senator colleagues endorsing him. I admire and like what he is saying, but that is not enough to sway me.
However, based on input from others like my daughter-in-law, a Millennial, he would make my list for consideration because I value her judgement. I simply would have to spend more time to research his work history.
The former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton does qualify even if I do have some major doubts, especially as to how she demonstrated her lack of sound judgement in pushing for 2011 U.S. military intervention in Libya which has become a failed state. I would need to find out if she has learned from her past major mistakes with far reaching tragic consequences. She does have the expertise in international affairs along with the connections that I feel are crucial for the success of my business. For me, not having warm feelings for someone is not a bar from her being hired. It just means that I would have to insure that she meets and abides by all mutually agreed upon expectations. There will not be one set of rules for her and another for my other managers. And yes, I would hold her accountable.
Finally, the Green Party presidential candidate, Dr. Jill Stein is a highly credentialed professional whom I would consider for the future vacancy of the U.S. presidency. The following synopsis is from a 10/12/12 Forbes article by Peter Reilly:
“Dr. Jill Stein is a mother, physician, longtime teacher of internal medicine, and pioneering environmental-health advocate.”
“Jill was born in Chicago and raised in suburban Highland Park, Illinois. She graduated magna cum laude from Harvard College in 1973, and from Harvard Medical School in 1979. Jill enjoys writing and performing music, and enjoys long walks with her Great Dane, Bandita. Dr. Stein lives in Lexington with her husband. She has two sons, Ben and Noah, who have graduated from college in the past few years. For more background information, click on the link below.”
UPDATE: This blog was updated on 3/2/16.
Dr. Jill Stein Talks Politics And Policy With CounterPunch …https://theobamacrat.com/…/dr-jill–stein-talks-politics-..2/26/16