Looking For Your Thoughts

[Cockpit4U]

I saw where Britt Hume made the comment that Vance’s lack of experience is a liability to the Trump campaign.

I respect Hume a great deal as a journalist as well as an independent thinker. I don’t always agree with the man but I do admire his analysis.

Now I know many in here would disagree with him on this but I want to take politics out of this for a moment.

Here’s the question.

I would suggest that experience isn’t a determining factor for a person to be a good President. It helps for sure, but is it a deciding factor??

To me judgement is far more important. As president, you have all these advisers who are experts in their respective fields. That’s where any president gets his experience and knowledge. If he brings a good team of advisors to the table then he’s good to go.

It’s his judgement on the various issues before him, his principles and values that will set him apart as a effective leader.

I’m looking for others thoughts on this, not political rhetoric.

Agree, disagree, it’s all good as long as you’re honest and give this some thought.

 

[ll74]

I saw where Britt Hume made the comment that Vance’s lack of experience is a liability to the Trump campaign.

I respect Hume a great deal as a journalist as well as an independent thinker. I don’t always agree with the man but I do admire his analysis.

Now I know many in here would disagree with him on this but I want to take politics out of this for a moment.

Here’s the question.

I would suggest that experience isn’t a determining factor for a person to be a good President. It helps for sure, but is it a deciding factor??

To me judgement is far more important. As president, you have all these advisers who are experts in their respective fields. That’s where any president gets his experience and knowledge. If he brings a good team of advisors to the table then he’s good to go.

It’s his judgement on the various issues before him, his principles and values that will set him apart as a effective leader.

I’m looking for others thoughts on this, not political rhetoric.

Agree, disagree, it’s all good as long as you’re honest and give this some thought.

Vance isn't running for President. That being said, there is no actual requirement besides 35 yrs old and a natural born citizen .(And permanent resident)

With that out of the way, it used to not be politically palpable to select VPs without much experience in politics, as that was seen as what voters wanted. Vance's selection has brought about Sara Palin who was widely seen as a horrible pick and had little to no experience as well.

Vance has less than two years in the Senate and before that was an author and venture capitalist.

I don't think Vance adds anything to the ticket to bring in votes, which doesn't seem politically smart when it's such a tight race. The one thing I can see he does bring is his media savviness, meaning the campaign can get someone on the air that stays on message without fear of a gaff.

And he has already openly stated that he would've obeyed Trump's orders on Jan 6, unlike Pence.

 

[Cockpit4U]

Good points but I would argue to compare Vance, who is running as VP, to say, Obama. Very similar backgrounds in experience but Obama was very effective due in no small measure to the expertise his advisors brought to the table. He chose some real warriors to advise him which, evidently since he was successful with his programs, made him a very successful president.

Vance on the other hand is running for VP. To my mind that’s about the same as “On The Job Training”.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Unfortunately, Trump will surround himself with yes men and not advisers that are experts.

 

[Cockpit4U]

I suppose that’s possible but that’s not the topic here.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Isn’t it? You said judgement “was far important”, and “If he brings a good team of advisors to the table then he’s good to go.”

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

I saw where Britt Hume made the comment that Vance’s lack of experience is a liability to the Trump campaign.

I respect Hume a great deal as a journalist as well as an independent thinker. I don’t always agree with the man but I do admire his analysis.

Now I know many in here would disagree with him on this but I want to take politics out of this for a moment.

Here’s the question.

I would suggest that experience isn’t a determining factor for a person to be a good President. It helps for sure, but is it a deciding factor??

To me judgement is far more important. As president, you have all these advisers who are experts in their respective fields. That’s where any president gets his experience and knowledge. If he brings a good team of advisors to the table then he’s good to go.

It’s his judgement on the various issues before him, his principles and values that will set him apart as a effective leader.

I’m looking for others thoughts on this, not political rhetoric.

Agree, disagree, it’s all good as long as you’re honest and give this some thought.

You’re right that the team that the candidate brings to the table is more important than the individual. It’s particularly true in the case of Trump/Vance where neither has the experience to occupy the Oval Office.

In his first term, Trump did have a team of Republican experts but often ignored them. This time, his team has created a clear blueprint for his second term, and Trump has announced he doesn’t know anything about it.

 

[Bn2f]

Good points but I would argue to compare Vance, who is running as VP, to say, Obama. Very similar backgrounds in experience but Obama was very effective due in no small measure to the expertise his advisors brought to the table. He chose some real warriors to advise him which, evidently since he was successful with his programs, made him a very successful president.

Vance on the other hand is running for VP. To my mind that’s about the same as “On The Job Training”.

Who did you vote for in the last election?
Who are you planning to vote for in this election? You’ve stated that your not looking for political rhetoric which I think you mean as confrontation, but my question is important.

Here’s my point and correct me if I am wrong. It would appear that you are saying that JD Vance doesn’t need experience because there’s a competent people around him if he does become president. Well, from where I’m sitting, you just describe the administration that is in place right now that has a competent VP. If you are here to talk of the journalistic integrity of Brett Hume then maybe by chance you got to hear some of the other analysts on Fox News and their take that the current president is not viable. Is your overall argument that the current administration isn’t competent and doesn’t have a VP in place to take over right now?

 

[KeithD]

Traditionally there are three avenues to obtain good experience to step into the U.S. president job--via the vice presidency, having been a governor, or having been a U.S. senator. If Vance is kept at Trump's side, seeing and absorbing everything, from campaign, through transition, if they get elected--and then at hand during whatever presidency Trump would have, then he'd be well-placed in experience to do the primary job of vice president, which is being able to step in immediately, if needed.

I'm of two minds on judgment and Vance. Either Vance is totally two-faced and his judgment is adjustable on personal success rather than principles and the good of the nation, or he's flexible enough to go with new understanding rather than entrenching himself in prior positioning--or a combination of the two, I suppose. I don't know what it was/is with Vance, but changing position as radically as he did to get into Trump's good graces challenges a claim to good judgment (where, for a politician, prior positions/acts are always up for scrutiny and repeating), which is based on having firm principles that don't swing with personal advantage.

 

[jaF0]

Donny doesn't want experience. Donny had experience in Pence. Donny felt betrayed by experience when Mikey didn't obey him. Donny wants obedience above all. Shut up and do as I say.

 

[subdudeme13]

Who did you vote for in the last election?
Who are you planning to vote for in this election? You’ve stated that your not looking for political rhetoric which I think you mean as confrontation, but my question is important.

Here’s my point and correct me if I am wrong. It would appear that you are saying that JD Vance doesn’t need experience because there’s a competent people around him if he does become president. Well, from where I’m sitting, you just describe the administration that is in place right now that has a competent VP. If you are here to talk of the journalistic integrity of Brett Hume then maybe by chance you got to hear some of the other analysts on Fox News and their take that the current president is not viable. Is your overall argument that the current administration isn’t competent and doesn’t have a VP in place to take over right now?

Just a thought reading this. The present administration is light years ahead of the previous administration. I like what JD Vance said about Trump back before Trump became President. I wonder what changed his mind?

 

[jaF0]

I'm of two minds on judgment and Vance. Either Vance is totally two-faced and his judgment is adjustable on personal success

JD wants the Big Chair. JD may be more likely to 25 Donny than Mikey was just to fulfill his own ambitions.

 

[ll74]

Just a thought reading this. The present administration is light years ahead of the previous administration. I like what JD Vance said about Trump back before Trump became President. I wonder what changed his mind?

I heard some analysis I somewhat agree with - Vance disliked Trump originally because of his character and changed his mind because of his policy.

 

[subdudeme13]

Traditionally there are three avenues to obtain good experience to step into the U.S. president job--via the vice presidency, having been a governor, or having been a U.S. senator. If Vance is kept at Trump's side, seeing and absorbing everything, from campaign, through transition, if they get elected--and then at hand during whatever presidency Trump would have, then he'd be well-placed in experience to do the primary job of vice president, which is being able to step in immediately, if needed.

I'm of two minds on judgment and Vance. Either Vance is totally two-faced and his judgment is adjustable on personal success rather than principles and the good of the nation, or he's flexible enough to go with new understanding rather than entrenching himself in prior positioning--or a combination of the two, I suppose. I don't know what it was/is with Vance, but changing position as radically as he did to get into Trump's good graces challenges a claim to good judgment (where, for a politician, prior positions/acts are always up for scrutiny and repeating), which is based on having firm principles that don't swing with personal advantage.

I was watching a vet that was at Omaha Beach describe the 2000+ dead. He described the sacrifices all those "Suckers and Losers" made. It is extremely difficult for me to believe how any Republican that supports Trump can look in the mirror.

 

[subdudeme13]

I heard some analysis I somewhat agree with - Vance disliked Trump originally because of his character and changed his mind because of his policy.

What Trump policy? "Me First"?

 

[Bn2f]

For a party that despises the people that occupy Hollywood, from Reagan to Dr. Oz to JD Vance, they don’t seem to have any problems putting up media celebrities For office. It’s no wonder that Michelle Obama and Oprah running for president is only credible in Republican circles.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

JD wants the Big Chair. JD may be more likely to 25 Donny than Mikey was just to fulfill his own ambitions.

I agree. Vance sees the the Vice Presidency as shortcut to the Presidency. Trump is old and tired. He hated being President the first time. He’s only running now to keep himself out of jail. If he’s elected again he’ll step down and let Vance do the hard work of governing.

 

[coati]

I heard some analysis I somewhat agree with - Vance disliked Trump originally because of his character and changed his mind because of his policy.

Trump has a policy platform?

 

[Bn2f]

let Vance do the hard work of governing.

Is that not what Trump asked of Mike Pence the first time? I know it’s true, but I cannot find the link because every search that I put in with Mike pence and governing brings up J6.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Is that not what Trump asked of Mike Pence the first time? I know it’s true, but I cannot find the link because every search that I put in with Mike pence and governing brings up J6.

I think in 2017 Trump was giddy with the idea he could just do whatever he wanted as President, so he just let things drift along while he played golf and Tweeted. We saw the results of his passivity when COVID hit.

JS Vance seems more aggressive than Pence. I think he would eagerly step the leadership vacuum left by Trump to push his unpopular hard-right agenda.

 

[SmokingFap]

I saw where Britt Hume made the comment that Vance’s lack of experience is a liability to the Trump campaign.

I respect Hume a great deal as a journalist as well as an independent thinker. I don’t always agree with the man but I do admire his analysis.

Now I know many in here would disagree with him on this but I want to take politics out of this for a moment.

Here’s the question.

I would suggest that experience isn’t a determining factor for a person to be a good President. It helps for sure, but is it a deciding factor??

To me judgement is far more important. As president, you have all these advisers who are experts in their respective fields. That’s where any president gets his experience and knowledge. If he brings a good team of advisors to the table then he’s good to go.

It’s his judgement on the various issues before him, his principles and values that will set him apart as a effective leader.

I’m looking for others thoughts on this, not political rhetoric.

Agree, disagree, it’s all good as long as you’re honest and give this some thought.

Obama had very little experience when he ran, and I believe he was an excellent president. I'm sure there have been many presidents in our history who had less than ideal experience, and many who had the right requisite experience who turned out to be awful presidents. So a balance of relevant experience, high moral character, and sound decision making skills would be ideal. But that's a big ask, and that person would still infuriate half of the country.

 

[dmallord]

Just a thought reading this. The present administration is light years ahead of the previous administration. I like what JD Vance said about Trump back before Trump became President. I wonder what changed his mind?

That would be called 'political expediency.' Wanting to stay in politics after you crash and burn in the wake of your opponent requires you to adapt and accept that you are as spineless as the next snake in the viper pit. Only by shedding your principles and your pride will you get an opportunity for advancement. You are now a witness to how politics works–for many.

There are few Dick and Liz Chaney and Joe Bidens with the moral aptitude and spines to stand up for principles in our nation at the moment.

 

[MajorRewrite]

I would suggest that experience isn’t a determining factor for a person to be a good President. It helps for sure, but is it a deciding factor??

To me judgement is far more important. As president, you have all these advisers who are experts in their respective fields. That’s where any president gets his experience and knowledge. If he brings a good team of advisors to the table then he’s good to go.

If a candidate has little or no governing experience, the voters have no way to truly rate their potential to be a good President.

A candidate can say anything, but you don’t know how good their judgment is unless they’ve actually held an office. I think that’s why voters tend to prefer governors over congressmen; the role is more comparable to a chief executive.

 

[ll74]

What Trump policy? "Me First"?

Mass deportation
Completely stop immigration
Get rid of departments

Etc .etc

 

[RobDownSouth]

It's a tough call. For decades now, a certain segment of the populace has said they want a candidate who would run America like a business. They had a brief glimpse of that with Harry S. Truman, who was a local politician and hat store owner prior to being in the right time in the right place when FDR succumbed under mysterious circumstances. It's worth remembering that Truman's second term approval numbers were once the lowest in history (I believe Dubya's pre-9/11 numbers surpassed them).

Trump appeared on the ersatz "reality show" The Apprentice and it suckered America into believing he was confident and could make tough decisions. He had no shortage of confidence in "real life", but he shied away from tough decisions and his four years in office were an unqualified disaster, capped off by his bungled response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

He only appears to appeal to those who had emotional coping skills stuck at a fourth-grade level.