There are some interesting governors around.
I absolutely maintain that governors are good sources for prospective presidents.
NOT lawmakers.
I have nothing against lawmakers, not at all, but that is a different branch of the government. It is not the executive branch.
If you want executive talent, you promote from the executive branch!
They have actually run a polity, and you can measure how they did. How are the roads, ambulance response times, percent of kids who read well, numbers of business startups, people moving in or out?
A lawmaker has not had to make people do things. He has run his own staff, and own office, and own campaign, but the desired product is that he is happy and he is reelected. Himself. He has not had to make other people happy.
A governor or businessman has previously run something. And failure was possible. A lawmaker cannot fail. A governor can.
There are some interesting governors around.
I absolutely maintain that governors are good sources for prospective presidents.
NOT lawmakers.
I have nothing against lawmakers, not at all, but that is a different branch of the government. It is not the executive branch.
If you want executive talent, you promote from the executive branch!
They have actually run a polity, and you can measure how they did. How are the roads, ambulance response times, percent of kids who read well, numbers of business startups, people moving in or out?
A lawmaker has not had to make people do things. He has run his own staff, and own office, and own campaign, but the desired product is that he is happy and he is reelected. Himself. He has not had to make other people happy.
A governor or businessman has previously run something. And failure was possible. A lawmaker cannot fail. A governor can.
You have either run something or you have not. That is the real aristocratic division of the human race.
If our dear Trump had a fault, it was that he was used to people having to do what they were supposed to do. I mean, it's their job, right? And it's going to make things work out well, right?
He was used to the rationality of business.
All his life, he had the ability to fire the ones who were spacey or didn't do their jobs. But in politics, he did not have the ability to get rid of people. So, he had to persuade, seduce, cajole. But he is a bit too proud and sure of himself, and has had to make sense himself to survive, to be good at that wheedling stuff.
He has lots of charm, but he may not have had enough practice in seducing. He never had to, before.
Life made sense, in business. Results, tangible results, won the day. Politics is another matter.
Half the country threw away a president who made them safe and rich. And they knew it. Results didn't matter to them. Why? Because their parents aren't in business and neither are they. People with jobs instead of their own tiny business do not think about results.
Their only desired result is group cohesion. Personal acceptance.
It is a mentality Trump did not understand because nobody has been someone else's employee in his family for three generations.
There are some interesting governors around.
I absolutely maintain that governors are good sources for prospective presidents.
NOT lawmakers.
I have nothing against lawmakers, not at all, but that is a different branch of the government. It is not the executive branch.
If you want executive talent, you promote from the executive branch!
They have actually run a polity, and you can measure how they did. How are the roads, ambulance response times, percent of kids who read well, numbers of business startups, people moving in or out?
A lawmaker has not had to make people do things. He has run his own staff, and own office, and own campaign, but the desired product is that he is happy and he is reelected. Himself. He has not had to make other people happy.
A governor or businessman has previously run something. And failure was possible. A lawmaker cannot fail. A governor can.
You have either run something or you have not. That is the real aristocratic division of the human race.