Can a Candadicy Based on Principles Win The Presidency Today?

I’ve been thinking about this.

  • Do you think it is possible that a candidate, a regular person with a solid background could build a grassroots campaign on nothing but their principles?
  • Can a candidate be viable without a party affiliation and a $500 million ad buy?
  • What if the campaign was only personal appearances, web access, position papers and direct debates (real ones – not the fake, TV produced kinds, but a true Robert’s Rules of Order, National Parliamentary Debate Association debate)?
  • Does a candidate have to be part of the political establishment?
  • Could a “crowdsourced” campaign garner enough funding to compete?

Isn’t what is wrong with government today that we have too many politicians in politics?

new-improved

They claim to be running on principles but they spend millions trying to hide what they really believe or to sell some plastic image of themselves to the public. It isn’t about principles these days, nobody digs deep enough or investigates enough anymore to even know if the candidate has a history that supports their claim to a particular position. Obama broke the mold on the plasticity of a candidate and half of America bought it because of the new box with “New and Improved!” on the outside and the same old lying politician on the inside. It wasn’t about Pennsylvania Avenue, it was all Madison Avenue.

  1. How many times have you said to yourself that Obama has never even run so much as a lemonade stand?
  2. How many times have you wished for somebody that has experienced a life like yours to be in the Oval Office?
  3. How many times have you said that you want a candidate who drives a 4 wheel drive truck every day (because it is not a campaign prop) with a beat up pair of leather gloves in the console, tools and a tow rope in the back, wears boots and looks like he has actually worked in a pair of jeans and not like he is wearing his high-waisted mom jeans for a photo op?
  4. How many times have you wished for a person to take the oath of office and mean it?
  5. How many times have you wished for a foreign policy that says, “You don’t want to do what is in America’s best interest? Say, about that aid check – it ain’t coming until you change your mind.“?
  6. How many times have you wished for a terrorism policy that says, “So, you say you hate America and want to destroy her. Do tell. Well,  I’m going to take you at your word and by the end of the week, your ass is going to disappear, and your mosque, too, if you choose to hide in it…and if the government that is harboring you doesn’t like it – please refer them to Item 5 on this list.“?
  7. Why do we allow government to exempt itself from the rules that the rest of us have to follow?
  8. Why do we allow media to have so much power?
  9. How many times have you wished for a candidate who could do something that MSNBC apparently can’t – look at a slice of watermelon and a bucket of KFC and think “I didn’t realize it was Sunday already! What channel is the game on?” and not think of the word “nigger”?
  10. Ever wish for someone with the ability to say to a Democrat, “Madame Pelosi, that’s the dumbest crock of shit that I have ever heard in my life.”?

Utah2016: He eats only 100% certified free range, racist free watermelon…and likes it.

I’m just sayin’.

About these ads

11 thoughts on “Can a Candadicy Based on Principles Win The Presidency Today?

  1. I think were a candidate clever enough, he could get away with a grassroots-type campaign. Here’s the rub: How does this candidate get to debate? They did not let Gary Johnson debate. What’s up with that? I’ll tell you what’s up! Johnson is a Lutheran! Uh-huh! The sick truth about this administration comes out! I’ve just about had it with all the Lutherphobes I’m surrounded by. We are a religion of peace!

  2. Some good questions, Utah.

    “Do you think it is possible that a candidate, a regular person with a solid background could build a grassroots campaign on nothing but their principles?”

    Sadly, no.

    “Can a candidate be viable without a party affiliation and a $500 million ad buy?”

    Not without major changes in the electoral system, changes that might be unconstitutional.

    “What if the campaign was only personal appearances, web access, position papers and direct debates (real ones – not the fake, TV produced kinds, but a true Robert’s Rules of Order, National Parliamentary Debate Association debate)?”

    We’d have a much better process, but one that too many Americans wouldn’t pay attention to. Oh, and candidates wouldn’t go for it. And you couldn’t prevent the other kind without violating the First Amendment.

    “Does a candidate have to be part of the political establishment?”

    To have the money needed for a credible campaign, probably–at least at anything beyond the local level.

    “Could a ‘crowdsourced’ campaign garner enough funding to compete?”

    I don’t think so — but I’d love to be proven wrong.

    “Isn’t what is wrong with government today that we have too many politicians in politics?”

    That’s certainly a big part of what’s wrong.

    “Why do we allow media to have so much power?”

    If by “we,” you mean American viewers and readers, it’s because most Americans are intellectually lazy, easily distracted, and busy trying to live their lives. Among other things. :-)

    “Ever wish for someone with the ability to say to a Democrat, ‘Madame Pelosi, that’s the dumbest crock of shit that I have ever heard in my life.'”?

    Yep, about as often as I wish for someone with the ability to say to a Republican, “Mr. Ryan, that’s the dumbest crock of shit that I have ever heard in my life.”

    “Nobody digs deep enough or investigates enough anymore to even know if the candidate has a history that supports their claim to a particular position.”

    For sure. That’s why we end up with supposed “outsiders” Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama. And why someone like Sarah Palin can have a national following.

    • Professor!
      Thank you for an eloquent comment.
      I agree with nearly everything you just responded with.
      texas

    • Thanks, Professor.

      I agree with your comments except for Palin – I don’t think she is anything other that what she says she is and for you to assert that her run didn’t generate examinations equivalent to a trip to the gynecologist is a bit untruthful…She and her family got the third degree, even to the point that Andrew Sullivan was making up stories about her not being the mother of her last child. Carter, Clinton and Bush all had long records in public life – all had been governors before running for president – as was Palin.

      The only one with a hidden history – to this day, I might add – is our current Commander-in-Chief.

      But all of that aside, isn’t a candidacy of the average citizen something to desire? We all know people in our private lives who are smarter and have more common sense than many of our elected leadership, don’t we?

      The person who doesn’t seek power typically does a better job of handling it than the one who does seek it.

      Many of the founders and early members of our early government feared two things – a hereditary monarchy and the rule by the few – we have so many career/lifelong politicians that it seems equivalent to a hereditary monarchy and we are definitely ruled by “the few”.

      I wasn’t proposing that we get rid of the other method of campaigning, I just wondered if a true groundswell of national support could come from such a campaign of substance. Look at the number of people who signed up for FaceBoook and things like Twitter and LinkedIn with really only internet presences…

      There is a first time for everything.

      Utah2016.

      • Personally, I think we should go back to the ORIGINAL method of selecting the President AS DESCRIBED BY THE CONSTITUTION. How many remember the method described by the Constitution when it was first ratified? It would solve a LOT of our current problems.

        but then, we would have to return to the original method of appointing the Senators, as well. One doesn’t really work as well without the other.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s