• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

‘It’d be my honour’: The Rock responds to poll showing 46% of people want him to run for president

Bodhisattva said:
It would be less complicated that being a CEO or investment banker or lawyer, or something. There are experts all over the place advising, etc.
Click to expand...
It would be less complicated than being in charge of an off-shore drilling platform. Still not an entry-level position.
 
joko104 said:
I gave up trying to help Democrats posting TDS infected messages.
Click to expand...
The question, Joko, was is President of the United States an entry-level government position.
 
Proposing unlikely people for President is no longer a thing. Trump ruined it. No one could be worse than Trump. No one else would claim the FBI, CIA, courts, press and elections are fake. No one else would try to sell the US military for personal political favors. No one else would incite violence against congress and the vice pres. We could go on. You know.

So, what does that mean? There's no shock value. There's no "what if". It couldn't be worse so whatever.

Throw out random names. Who cares? Nothing could be worse.
 
The bar is so low, one could propose a literal vegetable and my response would be 'meh'.
 
Grand Mal said:
The question, Joko, was is President of the United States an entry-level government position.
Click to expand...
Do you mean not coming from government employment?
 
joko104 said:
Do you mean not coming from government employment?
Click to expand...
Don't be an ass. I mean experience in government, It might be a useful column on the resume of someone applying for the job of President.
 
Grand Mal said:
Don't be an ass. I mean experience in government, It might be a useful column on the resume of someone applying for the job of President.
Click to expand...
Yes it could. However, elections are a comparison between the candidates, not claiming one candidate is flawed and asserting the other candidate is perfect.

Of course you mean civilian government, correct? Would military experience be a useful column on the resume of someone applying for the job of Commander In Chief to the importance you attach to direct experience necessary to be the civil government ranking executive? If so, then it must be your position that Joe Biden should not have won the Democratic Party's nominee and almost all the candidates would inherently lacking in resume qualification.
 
Grand Mal said:
It would be less complicated than being in charge of an off-shore drilling platform. Still not an entry-level position.
Click to expand...
We were never supposed to have career politicians... that is why a 35 year old can run.
 
MamboDervish said:
The Rock responds to poll showing 46% of people want him to run for president


I find that frightening. What is it about so many Americans who want unqualified people in the Oval Office?
Click to expand...
To be fair, I expect that he'd do a better job than Trump.
 
Bodhisattva said:
We were never supposed to have career politicians... that is why a 35 year old can run.
Click to expand...


Where’s the logic in that statement?

Average lifespan is somewhere between 70-80, right?
 
Bodhisattva said:
We were never supposed to have career politicians...
Click to expand...
LOL - "supposed to have" ?? Good one! If we were supposed to not have them, there would have been some proscription in the Constitution. There is none. In fact, the reason Senate elections are staggered, not all occurring at once, is because experience is desired, and designed to be maintained in the Capitol. Our federal government is conservative by design, favoring experience and continuity over the lack thereof.

In national office holders, we've had Senators as young as 30, and Congressmen as young as 22. Either position can provide a wealth of legislative experience. And the voters in our democracy have always favored incumbents. Government experience matters. Go figure.

As for Executive office holders, there have been dozens of mayors in their 20s and early 30s in cities ranging from Cleveland to Ogden to Des Plaines to Pittsburgh. In other words, plenty of government experience available in the Executive branch too, before aspiring to the Oval Office at age 36.
 
Last edited:
Rexedgar said:
Where’s the logic in that statement?

Average lifespan is somewhere between 70-80, right?
Click to expand...
The logic was not great but my point was that the argument that career politicians are more qualified for office is uneducated drivel. It that was the case then young people would not be allowed to run for office due to their inexperience and thereby inability to provide better leadership. The argument I am making is that thinking that length of service means more positive experience, less corruption or better leadership is stupid. It is literally stupid if a person thinks that and I would argue that, consequently, a person that thinks that is a stupid person.
 
MamboDervish said:
LOL - "supposed to have" ?? Good one! If we were supposed to not have them, there would have been some proscription in the Constitution. There is none. In fact, the reason Senate elections are staggered, not all occurring at once, is because experience is desired, and designed to be maintained in the Capitol. Our federal government is conservative by design, favoring experience and continuity over the lack thereof.

In national office holders, we've had Senators as young as 30, and Congressmen as young as 22. Either position can provide a wealth of legislative experience. And the voters in our democracy have always favored incumbents. Government experience matters. Go figure.

As for Executive office holders, there have been dozens of mayors in their 20s and early 30s in cities ranging from Cleveland to Ogden to Des Plaines to Pittsburgh. In other words, plenty of government experience available in the Executive branch too, before aspiring to the Oval Office at age 36.
Click to expand...
Jefferson wanted political rotation of office in order to prevent the creation of a permanent bureaucracy.. . which is what we now have.
 
The Mark said:
To be fair, I expect that he'd do a better job than Trump.
Click to expand...

Given an outbreak of a new virus, I know that the guy I’d want to be dealing with pharmaceutical companies would be an ex-wrestler turned actor.
 
President Rock's veto message:

"Hey Congress, go into your kitchen, look up in your cabinets, find this bill, and stick it straight up your candy ass!"

Drops people's elbow on Mitch McConnell.
 
Ouroboros said:
Given an outbreak of a new virus, I know that the guy I’d want to be dealing with pharmaceutical companies would be an ex-wrestler turned actor.
Click to expand...
I mean, as long as he has good staff he listens to.
 
joko104 said:
That is the standard most Democrats seem to require of their candidate. Just don't be Trump. Since no one is Trump but Trump, there is no standard whatsoever other than who the MSM, newspaper and Big Tech news - all owned and controlled by globalist plutocrats - tell them to vote for.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The GOP has a long, sordid history of supporting retarded fascists. Names like Bush/Cheney, Palin, Bachman, Bobert, Green and, yes, Trump, stand out but don't even scratch the surface of their poor decision making.

I think the problem is deeper than you think. Trump was merely the grand finale of the GOP fireworks display of transparently corrupt imbeciles. He was the corruptist, imbe-silliest of them all, the veritable sultan of stupid and the right LOVES him.

I shudder to think of what kind of half-wit criminal they'll run in '24. It should be a shit show on a grand scale.
 
Antiwar said:
Noooo.
Click to expand...

Jon Stewart is highly knowledgeable and intelligent. He's also a great American, he did more to get support for 9/11 first responders than, well, the entirety of our congress.

But it's just LIBRULS BAD to you, I guess.
 
With the Democrats fondness for half black politicians he should do pretty well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom