Do we really want a "normal" person as president?

[Prosperity]

Yet look what we keep getting

can't argue with that

[Smoot Point Really]

I think I want something "fresh"... It's not just about the person, it's about who the person brings with them. Obama might have been fresh, but his staff and everything around him reeks of moldy old liberal politics... it has been Clinton recycled. The few fresh faces he does put forward look completely shady and/or incompetent (like Geithner). I don't really think Palin would be able to put talented people around her, talented enough to really make a difference. Obama could've, but he chose mediocre talent. Bush had a class cabinet at the beginning, but ended up with only a few really competent people. I dunno... I'm leaning towards Romney, but I'm not sure what he'll bring either.

[fmorris]

I've seen a lot of Palin fans say she is an honest normal person and we are just scared of having a normal person in office. Do we want an everyday person as president? Or do we want a seasoned political professional in office? Why or why not?

I think in order to answer this question, we have to define what exactly an, "...honest normal person," and furthermore, how that would impact public office.

More to the point, how would her back ground differ from a politician of typical elitist pedigree? In looking at Palin one has to be impressed--a pretty typical social/family as well as educational background. I personally like this aspect of Palin as suggesting a sort of American normality.

That is, nothing stands out as "extraordinary". However, there is some elitist lineage on her mother's side, but this hasn't bought her any special privilege from what I can tell.

More to the point, what you may be really asking (as so many others) is if Ms. Palin would be "politics as normal" should we entrust her into a position of high leadership...more so than her current resigned position in Alaska.

The comparison you chose was, "seasoned political professional". So again we have to look at definitions. So many US citizens draw sizable distinctions in our two party system. In fact, I think we may conclude that there is a lack of purity in the ideology of said politicians, even when we venture to the far right or left. So cutting through all the B/S we can say that our two party system is but two sides of the same coin. This can be argued; however, the trend of moderate platforms is undeniable to most.

In this regard, Ms. Palin has NOT shown to be distinctive. She has conservative views on the abortion issue (Pro-life to a fault including rape/incest), has claimed that environmental issues are not man made (although she backslid on this issue during the presidential run), and supports oil/gas exploration. This suggests that she she is likely consistent with Bush policy in regards to our interest in the middle east and so suggests that she pretty much totes the company line...however,

her record indicates a trend to buck the system, and one finds contradictions of ideology vs. action. This dates back to her earliest political days and an example is supporting government cuts, but raising taxes when she feels it's appropriate. Palin has signed huge budgets (6.6 billion in state operations) and made substantial budget/funding cuts. She defended funding for the "bridge to nowhere," but churched up view (to the dismay of Alaskan citizens) during the elections.

So I ask, "Is Ms. Palin enough of a "maverick" to not be controlled/manipulated by special interests?" Does she trust in the tenants of a pure ideology, and is she willing to stick to these guns (no NRA pun), and if she is, will that hold up in the face of what it would take to get her name on a major party ticket in the future, or would she bend & break in a compromised effort to have watered down versions of her agendas implemented?

And if she is, indeed, this trend-bucking maverick, wouldn't special interest groups have all ready sniffed this out and relegated her to the scrap heap?

My suggestion is to follow the media which will ultimately provide the answers to these questions. If the media is building her up and seemingly prepping her for stardom, than it's one's duty to question, why?

If on the other hand, the media exploits her as a freak show, (and truthfully there is lots of fodder, ie her daughter, the Letterman thing, her resignation, policegate, etc) then she may very well be legit and therefore worth supporting--although this will do you no good as the elitist in this country still determine the appointment of important leaders. In the end it may be her unpredictability that is her downfall.

Just my 2 cents.

[NavyDave]

You mean like Bush? Just a normal guy, who you'd want to have a beer with?

Oh yeah, that's what we need. (If they are at that level of politics, they ain't so "normal")

Yeah Obama and Chicago politics are so normal. normally corrupt and intimidating. So are New Jersey,Louisiana and the DC area.

I guess to some, normal means officials who come from the grass roots not via the Ivy League cliques and then part of the beltway machine where everyone believes they own a piece of you and or deserves to have favors done in the form of policy.

Sarah received props for calling out corrupt members in her state's GOP party and businesses, who are bipartisan in their stance to destroy her politically because you don't want people who will rock the boat instead of lining their own pockets and getting their palms greased with questionable donations and I say that about both parties and all idealogies.

[JimboDaMan]

I'd like a President with a bit more style and a little less Erkle on a bike

Or one who isn't afraid to catch a football

I'm sure you searched but were unable to find the photo of George Bush falling off a Segway:doh:, right?

[mjah]

I'm sure you searched but were unable to find the photo of George Bush falling off a Segway:doh:, right?

I'm still waiting for the picture of Bush getting choked out and beaten up by the dreaded "pretzel-floor" combo.

[matty dread]

Palin is normal?

In what universe?

[IbleedBnG83]

What I liked most about Obama, was actually his LACK of time in politics. I think politicians become jaded, misguided, and liars after period of time. Do I trust everything Obama or any other politician says, NO. Do I feel that he is more down to Earth than other, YES.

Although I think that higher education can't teach you anything, I do also have a high regard for it. Palin has very little education. Obama graduated from Harvard with a Law degree. He, unlike George W., didn't have a lot of money growing up and made it on his own merit.

I feel that I can relate to Obama's upbringing much more than I ever could with any of the other Presidents. To me, he is the most "normal person" that has served as President and I like it.

[December90]

I've seen a lot of Palin fans say she is an honest normal person and we are just scared of having a normal person in office. Do we want an everyday person as president? Or do we want a seasoned political professional in office? Why or why not?

Well we certainly don't have a "seasoned political professional" in office right now.

We have a good campaigner who can tell lies with the best of them but when action is required, he doesn't have the foggiest clue what to do. (even worse is when he thinks he knows what to do, because then his actions are more harmful than his inaction.)

I want a leader who will actully "lead". One who will do the right thing instead of doing the popular thing. Right now we have to wait out an idiot leader and hopefully replace him before he does too much damage.

Do we have any politicians left who will stand up and put an end to the entitlements that are bankrupting our nation? Social Security is going bankrupt, the only arguement left is not "if" it is "when". Medicare is going bankrupt, again the only arguement left is not "if" it is "when". To this we are now looking to add national healthcare for everyone, cap and trade (Crap and tax) and many other wastes of the peoples money. :chair: