With the MeToo Movement and the Gun Control crowd, will Trump be re-elected in 2020 ?

@CopperCicada Sure, politicians bash each other all the time and, like you, I get tired of their nonsense rhetoric. However, saying that trump could turn these things into leadership opportunities is akin to saying that he could stop wearing a wig and spray painting his body orange.

Never gonna happen!

@room101 Yea. Sure. I guess I just don't see #MeToo and kids being pissed off about being killed at school as a monumental political obstacle. GWB had the Twin Towers go down. BO had the housing bubble pop.

[image deleted]@room101 @CopperCicada

@jackjjackson So who would you suggest runs the country? Any country. I'm not talking about individuals. I'm talking about what type of person. What experience should he or she have? What qualifications should he or she have? What kind of track record should he or she have?

A moderate between ages 45-50 who has had a real job for at least 20 years and managed a budget exceeding $50M for more than five years. Someone who who pledges to tweet a max of 3-5 times weekly and only about substantive issues. A verified IQ between 135-145. Zealots on either side need not apply. @room101

@jackjjackson So a senior executive of some kind of large corporate entity. Do you think that such a person would have any experience of social issues? Would they even be concerned about social issues?

Social issues get sorted out in the nomination processes and debates. @room101

@jackjjackson No, social issues get sorted out by policy decisions and the enactment of those policy decisions. If your ideal "politician" has never had to deal with social issues and has no concern for them (because his entire focus has always been on profit generation), how will he be able to understand them let alone debate them?

That what she or he will do in the nominating and debate process. Positions will be taken on social issues and evaluated by the voters. Quite a novel concept. The VOTERS decide. @room101

@jackjjackson That would require voters to be far more engaged than they are in reality. It would require no barriers to voting. It would require no skewing of electoral results. It would require referendums and elections every time a major decision needed to be made or every time there is any kind of fundamental change in situation. Be it internal or external.

And, even if all of that were to be accomplished, whatever decisions are made by the electorate would still need to be actually enacted.

What happens if your ideal "politician" decides that, given his high IQ and many years experience in multi-million dollar corporations, he knows better and decides that, since he or she was elected to govern, that's what he or she will do. Govern.

@room101 @jackjjackson

@room101 is dead on. The plebs are too disconnected from their political proxies to have any say in social issues. Our representatives always and consistently act contrary to their proxies because they are beholden to special interests.

I’d rather that than a politician beholden to special interests. @CopperCicada @room101

You want the behind the scenes political elite deciding social issues? Not me. No thank you. @room101

@jackjjackson So does that mean that every debate would be public? Does that mean that there would be no need for a Senate and Congress or would they be open to the public?

@jackjjackson "I’d rather that than a politician beholden to special interests."

But those special interests are always corporate. They are always from organisations who have a profit motive in pushing for a given policy or for blocking a given policy. And yet, your ideal "politician" comes from that corporate world.

Are you not actually giving power to the very people that you seem to be railing against?