Donald Trump

Boy do we have a candidate here.
Is he unpolished? Yes.
Is he lacking couth? Yes
Is he unqualified to President of the United States? Good question.

What are the qualifications to be President?  First you have to look at BOTH realms of the presidency; Chief of Government and Chief of State.

Chief of State is how he represents our citizens on the world scene and to a lesser degree here at home. How well we he would meet and deal with foreign governments and how will he be a cheerleader and encourager to we here at home.

Obviously Mrs. Clinton has more experience here, but how many bridges has she (or her husband) burned or damaged along the way. Obviously in the very short run, she holds advantage here. With the exception of George H.W Bush, all of our recent presidents have had little or no foreign policy experience.  Secretary Clinton does not seem really likeable. I am not sure she plays well in Berlin, Beirut, Beijing, or even Broad Street (London).

The worldview of Chief of State can be summed up in one way. How do  we view Vladimir Putin? Putin is not the most savory of characters, we (in the US) would prefer someone else be the Russian President, but his persona / and personal life seem to mean little in the overall view of the world in relation to Mr. Putin. We have to ask if the unsavory persona of Mr. Trump is any worse.

How they play here at home is a different issue. Trump has blown every PC rule there is to be had. He could be the veiled reviled persona on Law and Order SVU. He is NOT a 21st Century gentleman. If that by itself is disqualifying then so be it. Myself I feel like he is a coarse, BUT we are in a society where the words he used are pretty common. I hear all of these folks saying this isn't locker room talk but it was 30 years ago. It wasn't every guy, but there were a handful who talked the same smack. Richard Pryor didn't come up with his comedy all by himself. It was refining and condensing all the stuff he had heard over the years. Trump likewise. Billy Bush said he "Played ALONG". Even if it were tasteless, it was not so offensive to him that he called Trump's hand or just stood awkwardly silently.  The reason it isn't locker room talk today is because there are women in the locker rooms (like it or not.). I can assure you in an industrial building I have heard Lady in The House, Lady on Deck, or some other variant that meant watch what you were saying..IE clean it up. It wasn't because they needed to comb their hair or adjust their posture. Back when you had all male workplaces or gatherings, you heard this for some it was uncomfortable and we ignored it. Sometimes we said to stop it especially when directed against a particular woman. Others joined in the up roar and it often became a contest of whom could be the most unchaste. There are still people that are just as egregious in this in 2016 as in 1985.

Secretary Clinton on the other hand is not the most camera friendly person either. She either frowns or puts an insincere smile that looks forced and uncomfortable She has overlooked her husband's indiscretions as have many men and women since the beginning of time. Whether she chooses to overlook his shortcomings for his positives, or if she is just a chump you have to decide.  Marriage is more than just sex. She has apparently chosen other aspects to focus on.

So which one makes a better world leader? The jury is out.

Next post on the Chief of Government.

Trumps win?

It has been a while. Nobody was reading, so I just quit.

 Donald Trump. What kind of President do I think he will make? What is his experience level? The same as everybody else in the group that began the run last year  EXCEPT perhaps Mrs Clinton. Who actually has ANY experience that is comparable to being president of the USA? Mrs Clinton MIGHT have had enough experience watching while her husband was president and the additional experience of being Secretary of State to say she understands the scope of the job, but being in congress certainly doesn't prepare one to actually be president. Being an attorney doesn't either. Even running a business falls short.

So really all we can do is try to get an idea of the candidates character, their ability to learn new things, and their ability to adapt on the fly. Here is the problem with that. Every candidate is an actor playing a very carefully scripted role. Some (such as Senator Rubio) are completely thrown when the script is compromised or thwarted. Others just resort to repeating the same stale rants over and over when they are knocked off message. Trump seems to do neither. He seems to ramble around and just says what is on his mind. This is really attractive to many. It signals that he is not part of the machine we call government. That he is independent and thinks for himself.

Independence is not generally well regarded in check the box politics. There are conservative Americans who vote Democratic almost solely based on their support of abortion rights. Likewise some are equally entrenched with the Republicans solely over the fight against abortion.  So solely on these two issues, many decide on who they will vote with. The idea that I / we might agree with someone who does not check the proper box on the issue makes them unacceptable. So how did the Donald get through? He is kinda grey on more than one of the CONSERVATIVE boxes.

I guess the better answer is a movie: a Richard Pryor movie. Brewster's Millions. Where he launches a campaign for mayor of New York (never dreaming he could win.) So basically those who voted for Trump (and even to some extent Bernie Sanders) voted for "NONE OF THE ABOVE"