Who do you think would be better than Walker?
This is just a theory that I've been tossing around for a couple years now. The general fact regarding incumbent and/or known candidates having overwhelming advantage in elections and re-elections is well known. However, maybe... just maybe... the voting populace actually did choose Obama *because* he was a relative outsider. Maybe people did consciously go for the "new guy" over the 'old and stale', because they were tired of the same old crap.
If so, it doesn't seem to have worked out well for us. One of Obama's biggest failures has been his utter inability to even communicate with Congress. Either side of Congress, even.
This potential is causing me to rethink what has become for me a knee-jerk reaction against incumbents. Maybe we need people with at least some experience, people who understand the game and who will play the game.
I have to wonder if Obama could have been a decent President if he had a couple more Senate terms under his belt, and maybe this is why the Dems aren't putting forth any new names this time.
Obama's tenure as senator was not exemplary since it was obvious both at the state and national level that he had little interest in issues or government and, as a result, doesn't have a commendable voting record either place. He was being groomed for personal glory and I believe that has been his goal. I believe he has little or no interest in governing now and sometimes he seems frustrated or irritated that he is even being bothered with mundane things like the economy or civil unrest or terrorism. I don't believe I have ever detected even a flash of true passion or conviction in this man ever. The closest thing to it is when he talks about Islam. There he does become more animated and engaged. There he has been very consistent.
The questionable people he surrounds himself with, his disinterest in and cluelessness of what drives the economy and his seemingly unawareness of the damage that his policies such as the ACA are doing, and his unwillingness to be a competent administrator and thereby allowing bureaucrats to run amuck, have set the country back significantly. His goal is to be loved and appreciated by those he thinks he can persuade to love and appreciate him and that is what he focuses on. Everybody else can be damned for all he seems to care. He makes George Bush look good and makes Bill Clinton look brilliant.
A Scott Walker I believe would surround himself with good people who would offset his personal weaknesses, he would educate himself on issues as the need arose, he would be hands on and engaged in governance and administration, and I think would do a credible job as POTUS. I just think, given that simple lack of a diploma, he is likely unelectable.
Color me unsurprised that liberal / progressive / Democrat / Elitists value academic theoretical knowledge over hard won practical, 'hands on' knowledge.
You can see it in the theory based public policies they keep pushing, rather than ones based on common sense and the real world, and yet they keep wondering why their public policies keep failing. :lamo
What's that about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results? :lamo
Indeed. One wonders that if he hasn't done anything about his 'agenda' from "Day One" by now, what makes us think he will focus on it in the next two years?
why does the US have better GDP growth and unemployment stats than WI ?
"I will work with them...?"
Beginning when?
What a nasty little arrogant prick this guy is. Never lets even the slightest jab go by, not one ounce of humility.
I don't know. Does it? Wisconsin I believe ranks 20th in the nation in population and 20th in the nation in GDP. And it also has a decent record on wage/household income increase and I believe is in the top 10 states with lowest official and actual unemployment rates. Seems to me the folks in Wisconsin are doing okay.
Like the War on Drugs?
Like the War on Terror?
Like Trickle Down Economics?
http://urbanmilwaukee.com/2015/02/16/data-wonk-the-walker-economic-record/
terrible compared to neighbors and nation
Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization for States
19th and 18th in unemployment
but hey, don't bother looking things up. you with "belief" and "the gut".
Disability rights advocates in Wisconsin are concerned and surprised by a number of proposed cuts and changes to care services in Gov. Scott Walker's two-year budget.
Both Disability Rights Wisconsin and the Survival Coalition of Wisconsin Disability Organizations released memos this month highlighting provisions of the budget that would affect people with disabilities, including changes to long-term care for adults and children, the elimination of several programs and decreased legislative oversight of managed care organizations.
"We are really surprised by this, because there was no indication that changes of this magnitude were going to take place," said Beth Swedeen, executive director of the Wisconsin Board for People with Developmental Disabilities. "This seems to be a surprise to everybody: managed care organizations, the IRIS program, participants. Nobody seems to have known that this was coming."
The rest of the article here.
Vance Mack suggests Walker has done nothing new in Wisconsin. As per Vance Mack's suggestion I am looking closer at Scott Walker and will continue to look and compare his record with his predecessors. Up to this point I haven't been steady looking for Walker articles. My mind is already made up about him. But it won't hurt to spend some time reading about Walker.
This today:
A few things I noticed. No one who is or will be affected by Walker's proposed change in state long term care knew anything about Walker's proposed change. People who questioned the change including the press were told to contact the state Department of Health Services (DHS). Apparently DHS didn't know about Walker's big plans either. Seems Walker didn't do his homework, didn't talk to stakeholders, didn't talk to state agencies prior to announcing changes. He did apparently talk to insurance companies, however. Imagine that. If that is correct, it's playing it backwards, isn't it? Shouldn't the other people be the first to be contacted and shouldn't have discussions have been held with stakeholders?
Those particular 3 policies are more grounded in fact and common sense than the ones typically purported by the left side of the spectrum.
Like the War on Drugs vs. Legalize all drugs - Which makes more sense, I mean in a practical sense?
Like the War on Terror vs. Ignore terrorists flying airplanes into building - Which makes more sense, I mean in a practical sense?
Like Trickle Down Economics vs. Massive government control and influence on the economy, ever increasing government debt and ever higher taxes - Which makes more sense, I mean in a practical sense?
Thanks for proving my point.
You have to understand.. this is the kind of stuff you learn in college.
Your definition of common sense appears to be a matter of convenience.
Indeed. One wonders that if he hasn't done anything about his 'agenda' from "Day One" by now, what makes us think he will focus on it in the next two years?
Still bitter/confused/hurt by Obama's back-to-back wins?
Still bitter/confused/hurt by Obama's back-to-back wins?
It's only relevant to people who were never going to vote for him anyway.
So you had planned on voting for Walker until you heard this news then?I would not dismiss Scott Walker's not having a degree so nonchalantly. We live in a complex global world where every presidential contender should be armed with every defense possible beginning with a college degree and not leave himself exposed to those who are better prepared. A degree teaches one to think and to do the best job possible armed with a brain that is confident and capable of communicating with all leaders from all countries -- not evade a trivial question like evolution because he's afraid of displeasing his puppeteers. George W Bush supposedly received an MBA, but the proof of how well he did is reflected in his often repeated malapropism. This just shows college is not for everyone, but then again, GWB should never have been president of the US because he was an unmitigated disaster for America and consequently for the world.
I would not dismiss Scott Walker's not having a degree so nonchalantly. We live in a complex global world where every presidential contender should be armed with every defense possible beginning with a college degree and not leave himself exposed to those who are better prepared. A degree teaches one to think and to do the best job possible armed with a brain that is confident and capable of communicating with all leaders from all countries -- not evade a trivial question like evolution because he's afraid of displeasing his puppeteers. George W Bush supposedly received an MBA, but the proof of how well he did is reflected in his often repeated malapropism. This just shows college is not for everyone, but then again, GWB should never have been president of the US because he was an unmitigated disaster for America and consequently for the world.
So you had planned on voting for Walker until you heard this news then?
I would not dismiss Scott Walker's not having a degree so nonchalantly. We live in a complex global world where every presidential contender should be armed with every defense possible beginning with a college degree and not leave himself exposed to those who are better prepared. A degree teaches one to think and to do the best job possible armed with a brain that is confident and capable of communicating with all leaders from all countries -- not evade a trivial question like evolution because he's afraid of displeasing his puppeteers. George W Bush supposedly received an MBA, but the proof of how well he did is reflected in his often repeated malapropism. This just shows college is not for everyone, but then again, GWB should never have been president of the US because he was an unmitigated disaster for America and consequently for the world.
I would not dismiss Scott Walker's not having a degree so nonchalantly. We live in a complex global world where every presidential contender should be armed with every defense possible beginning with a college degree and not leave himself exposed to those who are better prepared. A degree teaches one to think and to do the best job possible armed with a brain that is confident and capable of communicating with all leaders from all countries -- not evade a trivial question like evolution because he's afraid of displeasing his puppeteers. George W Bush supposedly received an MBA, but the proof of how well he did is reflected in his often repeated malapropism. This just shows college is not for everyone, but then again, GWB should never have been president of the US because he was an unmitigated disaster for America and consequently for the world.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?