rethinking what it takes to be a representative of the people - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ARTelevision · 10-10-2003, 04:26 AM

There's a trend in politics I favor:
this has to do with electing people who are qualified for the job not by "professional politican" standards, but more simply because they are citizens who have distinguished themselves as strong human beings with people skills of a certain type - people skills that are perceived and defined by the electorate as leadership ability.

Partisan arguments and those that court character assasination notwithstanding, an understanding of what qualities people are looking for in a leader today are eye-opening - if we choose to look at them squarely, without flinching.

Here's an editorial about Arnold that sums up these points and also refers to the disenchantment with professional politicians:

The message of the ‘Governator’s’ victory

Schwarzenegger’s win in California is a warning to politicians everywhere

From the York, PA "York Daily Record"
Friday, October 10, 2003

The Terminator terminated the rule of Gov. Gray Davis.
In the great state of California, voters upset with Gov. Davis’ clearly pathetic performance as the state’s chief executive booted him from office in favor of Arnold Schwarzenegger, a man who has no experience in government.

It seems silly that voters in the most populous state in the nation — the fifth-largest economy in the world — would toss out an experienced political hand for a man whose government experience is limited to serving on the President’s Council of Physical Fitness.

That prospect has a lot of people wringing their hands, wondering just what has happened to our political system when a candidate who runs a campaign based mostly on charisma and celebrity can take over a campaign in a state facing serious political problems.

The answer is simple: Voters are angry.

And politicians better listen.

This political earthquake in California sends a powerful message to politicians throughout the land. Do your job or you’ll find yourself holding a one-way ticket to Palookaville.

That’s where Gov. Davis finds himself today, less than one year after he won re-election. Voters booted Gov. Davis for a variety of reasons — his fiscal incompetence that left the state with an $8 billion deficit, his ineffectual management of the state’s energy crisis, his seemingly complete lack of any kind of charisma or empathy for the citizens of the Golden State.

Gov. Davis was the author of his own tragedy.

The voters of California wrote the ending and have begun a new chapter of what can only be described as a great action-adventure.

They selected, from among 135 candidates, the action hero, a man who pledged to go to the state capital and clean house.

By doing so, voters ignored recent press reports that Mr. Schwarzenegger groped several women and that, at one time, may have expressed admiration of Adolf Hitler’s public speaking ability.

Those supposed issues, the majority of voters apparently decided, were not important. Perhaps, this signals a change in our political process, a repudiation of the politics of personal smear and attack. Or perhaps, it is an indication of Mr. Schwarzenegger’s formidable political skills. His handling of the mini-crisis — in a refreshing, straightforward manner and even offering that bane of a politician’s existence, an apology — may have revealed more of his character to voters than the attacks on his personal behavior.

Mr. Schwarzenegger was criticized for not offering specifics about how he planned to solve the state’s fiscal crisis. But he offered as many specifics as any other serious candidate in the race.

Mr. Schwarzenegger’s campaign wisely tapped into voters’ anger with politicians who are out of touch with their everyday concerns. His populist campaign touched on issues that voters could relate to. He promised to work for the people, a constituency that many voters felt Gov. Davis and perhaps other professional politicians beholden to special interests and campaign contributors have forgotten.

It was no fluke that the line in Mr. Schwarzenegger’s stump speeches that garnered the most applause was his promise to repeal the recent tripling of car registration fees. The message? Arnold cares about the little guy.

Mr. Schwarzenegger faces a monumental challenge in California. The state is broke. Its credit rating is at junk-bond status.

Whether the action star is up to the challenge remains to be seen. He has several things going for him. He’s smart; he’s successful; he’s a leader. He’s going to need to call upon all of his skills and talent to make California work.

But from this vantage point — 3,000 miles away — the message contained in his victory is a warning to politicians.

Do your job.

Or be terminated.

Conclamo Ludus · 10-10-2003, 05:07 AM

Its an interesting message. Its really a nonpartisan message as well. It wasn't the voters disppointed with the democratic party, it was the voters uprising against politicians in general. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It was impressive that Arnold, although a liberal republican, received 17% of the registered democrats votes. The recall race had clearly become a nonpartisan kiss-off to the boys running the show in Sacramento. I think its refreshing.

maximusveritas · 10-10-2003, 05:50 AM

Arnold won because of his celebrity and the widespread dislike for Gray Davis. That's all. Nothing else going on here.
This whole thing about Arnold not being a "professional politician" was his own spin to keep people from saying he was unqualified. In truth, he had very strong Republican ties. His whole team was basically comprised of Pete Wilson's old guys.
Others, like Jesse Ventura, have won on populist "outsider" campaigns before and then failed to deliver once they actually get into office. People were saying the same things when Ventura won. Of course, he was actually an independent unlike Arnold.
If this California election is a sign of things to come around the country, its certainly not a good sign. Are we to become a nation ruled by celebrities? I personally feel our leaders should be more than just figureheads or puppets. Its not enough to win on your name and "hire the best people" to actually do the work.

Liquor Dealer · 10-10-2003, 05:55 AM

American politics have become to political - sounds stupid when you say it like that but politics have become far more important to to many politicians than has good government. Politicians have become entities of themselves and have often forgotten those who they claim to represent. In an ideal world we might eliminate politics totally from the picture and send nothing but men and women to the Capitol Building, and to state capitals, who have no agenda other than to secure the best possible government for those who the represent. I don't know what it would take to restore that type of government - perhaps term limits would solve the biggest of the problems, the power that comes with seniority and the "good old boy" system. If all elected officials were allowed two terms in office, and only two, this might be accomplished. The 22nd Ammendment was enacted because of the fears of another Roosevelt Dictatorship - call it what you like but the length of time he was allowed to rule created all but an absolute dictatorship. The American Congress and people had the balls to say two terms is all anyone needs or should have, and perhaps it is high time we broadened that idea to cover all elected positions in government. If one were to do such an outstanding job in the House for two two year terms and had the approval of the people then he could serve two terms in the Senate - He or she would then be elgible to run for an Executive office. The Judicial Branch of our government has succeeded in reaching a new low and I honestly believe that it is party politics that have deteriorated our legal system to its current state. The idea of party politics was never envisioned by the framers of the Constitution and later modifications have not adequately made provisions for it either. Something has got to be done to restore the faith of the American people in its government. The quality, or lack thereof in a few of our elected officials has led to a distrust of all who seek public office and the lofty requirements some are asked to meet have eliminated far too many good people from the idea of even seeking office. The medias attempt to sway the election in California and elsewhere is just an example of how far down the tubes our system has ventured. It makes no damn difference what-so-ever that Arnold did, or did not do in the area of booby squeezing - he was not running for state boobie inspector, and had he been, this might have been a plus rather than part of a morals smear campaign launched by the LA Times. If the people feel good enough to put him in a position to govern then the people have spoken and he is entitled to sink or swim based on what he does now, not on anything he has ever done in his past. The man had enough guts to admit he wasn't perfect and that he was no angel - To me, that is a vast improvement over the Hillerienators wimp of a husband. End of rant.

mb99usa · 10-10-2003, 07:10 AM

I have to chime in here. I think the whole problem with who we have to choose from to lead us is because it comes down to only 2 real choices. You can either pick a life-long politician or a celebrity/wealthy individual. The problem stems from how much it costs to get elected. The life-long politician will have the backing and money from one of the major parties and the celebrity/wealthy individual will have their own money to front if they don't have the backing of a major party.

The election in California proved this. Out of the 135 people running Schwarzenegger had the most money and in his case party backing. Noone else had a chance against him regardless of their qualifications or experience.

The other issue is name recognition. California's recent election had several nationally known names but none larger than Schwarzenegger. When anyone walks in to a voting booth and looks at the choices, unless they are really looking to shake things up, will choose names they recognize. Everyone likes familiarity and choosing a recognizable name brings comfort.

Anyone can run for office but how many votes do you think you'll get on a shoe-string campaign budget with no party behind you?

homerhop · 10-10-2003, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ARTelevision
.
By doing so, voters ignored recent press reports that Mr. Schwarzenegger groped several women and that, at one time, may have expressed admiration of Adolf Hitler’s public speaking ability.

Please dont take me up wrong but have you ever watched any of the speaches that Hitler made. If politicians could put the energy and emotions that Hitler put into his speaches alot more people would be out voting. It would do them good to sit down and study these, not for their context but for how they were delivered.

Liquor Dealer · 10-10-2003, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by homerhop
Please dont take me up wrong but have you ever watched any of the speaches that Hitler made. If politicians could put the energy and emotions that Hitler put into his speaches alot more people would be out voting. It would do them good to sit down and study these, not for their context but for how they were delivered.

Or watch Fidel Castro - He handles an audience like it is a puppet on a string - Great public speakers have the ability to take an audience wherever they want it to go - an extremely dangerous gift when in the hands of the wrong people.

MuadDib · 10-10-2003, 09:26 AM

I agree, the problem is campaign financing. Because it costs millions of dollars to run and win an election that means most politicians have to go to corporate interest and special interest groups for money. At that point they are in for a certain number of years (depending on their office) and they have to appease the donaters so they can win their next election. See the problem? For politicians, we have made job security and their well being contingient on selling out to corporate and special interest! This is why we need only publicly financed campaigns! If politicians were more dependant on their constituency than their contributers for job security then career politicians wouldn't be a problem, in fact I think they would be a blessing.

The deal with democracy in America is that it almost has to be a representative democracy. At that point we need "career politicians" to maintain elder statesman and specialist within politics. Some of our countries best people in Congress have been there for over a decade. It takes years to do things and make change in Congress and we need to realize that. We don't need great speakers or motivators. They turn out to be illusionists, convincing the public of what it needs instead of listening to the public tell them what it needs. What we need it doers who are more interested in the public will than the private sector and who don't value keeping their job over doing what is right. We have a few leaders like that now... we need more.

sixate · 10-10-2003, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ARTelevision
There's a trend in politics I favor:
this has to do with electing people who are qualified for the job not by "professional politican" standards, but more simply because they are citizens who have distinguished themselves as strong human beings with people skills of a certain type - people skills that are perceived and defined by the electorate as leadership ability.

I couldn't agree more. I've basically said the exact same thing in another thread.

Another thing. Arnold is a winner. He is a successful man and knows how to surround himself with people who will help him out. I hope he does a good job because he'll make all politicians look like fools... Then maybe they'll start to change their ways.

10-10-2003, 04:26 AM	#1 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	rethinking what it takes to be a representative of the people There's a trend in politics I favor: this has to do with electing people who are qualified for the job not by "professional politican" standards, but more simply because they are citizens who have distinguished themselves as strong human beings with people skills of a certain type - people skills that are perceived and defined by the electorate as leadership ability. Partisan arguments and those that court character assasination notwithstanding, an understanding of what qualities people are looking for in a leader today are eye-opening - if we choose to look at them squarely, without flinching. Here's an editorial about Arnold that sums up these points and also refers to the disenchantment with professional politicians: The message of the ‘Governator’s’ victory Schwarzenegger’s win in California is a warning to politicians everywhere From the York, PA "York Daily Record" Friday, October 10, 2003 The Terminator terminated the rule of Gov. Gray Davis. In the great state of California, voters upset with Gov. Davis’ clearly pathetic performance as the state’s chief executive booted him from office in favor of Arnold Schwarzenegger, a man who has no experience in government. It seems silly that voters in the most populous state in the nation — the fifth-largest economy in the world — would toss out an experienced political hand for a man whose government experience is limited to serving on the President’s Council of Physical Fitness. That prospect has a lot of people wringing their hands, wondering just what has happened to our political system when a candidate who runs a campaign based mostly on charisma and celebrity can take over a campaign in a state facing serious political problems. The answer is simple: Voters are angry. And politicians better listen. This political earthquake in California sends a powerful message to politicians throughout the land. Do your job or you’ll find yourself holding a one-way ticket to Palookaville. That’s where Gov. Davis finds himself today, less than one year after he won re-election. Voters booted Gov. Davis for a variety of reasons — his fiscal incompetence that left the state with an $8 billion deficit, his ineffectual management of the state’s energy crisis, his seemingly complete lack of any kind of charisma or empathy for the citizens of the Golden State. Gov. Davis was the author of his own tragedy. The voters of California wrote the ending and have begun a new chapter of what can only be described as a great action-adventure. They selected, from among 135 candidates, the action hero, a man who pledged to go to the state capital and clean house. By doing so, voters ignored recent press reports that Mr. Schwarzenegger groped several women and that, at one time, may have expressed admiration of Adolf Hitler’s public speaking ability. Those supposed issues, the majority of voters apparently decided, were not important. Perhaps, this signals a change in our political process, a repudiation of the politics of personal smear and attack. Or perhaps, it is an indication of Mr. Schwarzenegger’s formidable political skills. His handling of the mini-crisis — in a refreshing, straightforward manner and even offering that bane of a politician’s existence, an apology — may have revealed more of his character to voters than the attacks on his personal behavior. Mr. Schwarzenegger was criticized for not offering specifics about how he planned to solve the state’s fiscal crisis. But he offered as many specifics as any other serious candidate in the race. Mr. Schwarzenegger’s campaign wisely tapped into voters’ anger with politicians who are out of touch with their everyday concerns. His populist campaign touched on issues that voters could relate to. He promised to work for the people, a constituency that many voters felt Gov. Davis and perhaps other professional politicians beholden to special interests and campaign contributors have forgotten. It was no fluke that the line in Mr. Schwarzenegger’s stump speeches that garnered the most applause was his promise to repeal the recent tripling of car registration fees. The message? Arnold cares about the little guy. Mr. Schwarzenegger faces a monumental challenge in California. The state is broke. Its credit rating is at junk-bond status. Whether the action star is up to the challenge remains to be seen. He has several things going for him. He’s smart; he’s successful; he’s a leader. He’s going to need to call upon all of his skills and talent to make California work. But from this vantage point — 3,000 miles away — the message contained in his victory is a warning to politicians. Do your job. Or be terminated. __________________ create evolution

10-10-2003, 05:07 AM	#2 (permalink)
Conclamo Ludus Modern Man Location: West Michigan	Its an interesting message. Its really a nonpartisan message as well. It wasn't the voters disppointed with the democratic party, it was the voters uprising against politicians in general. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It was impressive that Arnold, although a liberal republican, received 17% of the registered democrats votes. The recall race had clearly become a nonpartisan kiss-off to the boys running the show in Sacramento. I think its refreshing. __________________ Lord, have mercy on my wicked soul I wouldn't mistreat you baby, for my weight in gold. -Son House, Death Letter Blues

10-10-2003, 05:55 AM	#4 (permalink)
Liquor Dealer Super Agitator Location: Just SW of Nowhere!!! In the good old US of A	American politics have become to political - sounds stupid when you say it like that but politics have become far more important to to many politicians than has good government. Politicians have become entities of themselves and have often forgotten those who they claim to represent. In an ideal world we might eliminate politics totally from the picture and send nothing but men and women to the Capitol Building, and to state capitals, who have no agenda other than to secure the best possible government for those who the represent. I don't know what it would take to restore that type of government - perhaps term limits would solve the biggest of the problems, the power that comes with seniority and the "good old boy" system. If all elected officials were allowed two terms in office, and only two, this might be accomplished. The 22nd Ammendment was enacted because of the fears of another Roosevelt Dictatorship - call it what you like but the length of time he was allowed to rule created all but an absolute dictatorship. The American Congress and people had the balls to say two terms is all anyone needs or should have, and perhaps it is high time we broadened that idea to cover all elected positions in government. If one were to do such an outstanding job in the House for two two year terms and had the approval of the people then he could serve two terms in the Senate - He or she would then be elgible to run for an Executive office. The Judicial Branch of our government has succeeded in reaching a new low and I honestly believe that it is party politics that have deteriorated our legal system to its current state. The idea of party politics was never envisioned by the framers of the Constitution and later modifications have not adequately made provisions for it either. Something has got to be done to restore the faith of the American people in its government. The quality, or lack thereof in a few of our elected officials has led to a distrust of all who seek public office and the lofty requirements some are asked to meet have eliminated far too many good people from the idea of even seeking office. The medias attempt to sway the election in California and elsewhere is just an example of how far down the tubes our system has ventured. It makes no damn difference what-so-ever that Arnold did, or did not do in the area of booby squeezing - he was not running for state boobie inspector, and had he been, this might have been a plus rather than part of a morals smear campaign launched by the LA Times. If the people feel good enough to put him in a position to govern then the people have spoken and he is entitled to sink or swim based on what he does now, not on anything he has ever done in his past. The man had enough guts to admit he wasn't perfect and that he was no angel - To me, that is a vast improvement over the Hillerienators wimp of a husband. End of rant. __________________ Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

10-10-2003, 07:10 AM	#5 (permalink)
mb99usa Keep on rolling. It only hurts for a little while. Location: wherever I am	I have to chime in here. I think the whole problem with who we have to choose from to lead us is because it comes down to only 2 real choices. You can either pick a life-long politician or a celebrity/wealthy individual. The problem stems from how much it costs to get elected. The life-long politician will have the backing and money from one of the major parties and the celebrity/wealthy individual will have their own money to front if they don't have the backing of a major party. The election in California proved this. Out of the 135 people running Schwarzenegger had the most money and in his case party backing. Noone else had a chance against him regardless of their qualifications or experience. The other issue is name recognition. California's recent election had several nationally known names but none larger than Schwarzenegger. When anyone walks in to a voting booth and looks at the choices, unless they are really looking to shake things up, will choose names they recognize. Everyone likes familiarity and choosing a recognizable name brings comfort. Anyone can run for office but how many votes do you think you'll get on a shoe-string campaign budget with no party behind you? __________________ So, what's your point? It's not an attitude, it's a way of life.

10-10-2003, 09:26 AM	#8 (permalink)
MuadDib Psycho	I agree, the problem is campaign financing. Because it costs millions of dollars to run and win an election that means most politicians have to go to corporate interest and special interest groups for money. At that point they are in for a certain number of years (depending on their office) and they have to appease the donaters so they can win their next election. See the problem? For politicians, we have made job security and their well being contingient on selling out to corporate and special interest! This is why we need only publicly financed campaigns! If politicians were more dependant on their constituency than their contributers for job security then career politicians wouldn't be a problem, in fact I think they would be a blessing. The deal with democracy in America is that it almost has to be a representative democracy. At that point we need "career politicians" to maintain elder statesman and specialist within politics. Some of our countries best people in Congress have been there for over a decade. It takes years to do things and make change in Congress and we need to realize that. We don't need great speakers or motivators. They turn out to be illusionists, convincing the public of what it needs instead of listening to the public tell them what it needs. What we need it doers who are more interested in the public will than the private sector and who don't value keeping their job over doing what is right. We have a few leaders like that now... we need more. __________________ "The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

10-10-2003, 05:50 AM	#3 (permalink)
maximusveritas Winner	Arnold won because of his celebrity and the widespread dislike for Gray Davis. That's all. Nothing else going on here. This whole thing about Arnold not being a "professional politician" was his own spin to keep people from saying he was unqualified. In truth, he had very strong Republican ties. His whole team was basically comprised of Pete Wilson's old guys. Others, like Jesse Ventura, have won on populist "outsider" campaigns before and then failed to deliver once they actually get into office. People were saying the same things when Ventura won. Of course, he was actually an independent unlike Arnold. If this California election is a sign of things to come around the country, its certainly not a good sign. Are we to become a nation ruled by celebrities? I personally feel our leaders should be more than just figureheads or puppets. Its not enough to win on your name and "hire the best people" to actually do the work.