Presidential requirements

The 2016 election is right around the corner. We are a diverse community with different values. Who we vote for reflect those values. What do you look for in a presidential candidate? Do you already know who you're voting for?

I'm undecided, but it'll probably be Clinton. If not her, then Bernie Sanders.

Wouldn't want to vote for anybody who believes in some religious god or being, or in any religion in general.

Nothing wrong with it so long as they don't let it dictate their actions.

And if a person really believes in something, most definitely it dictates their actions.

Agreed, but I don't really care about what the candidates believe in, just so long as they're smart enough to make crucial decisions and do critical thinking for the good of the country. That's why I think only people with IQs 130 and higher should run for presidency. We don't need another Bush. Besides, people with high IQs usually aren't religious, so it'll be killing two birds with one stone. Of course, we'd have to lower the age requirement to 18 (or 21) otherwise there will be very few candidates to choose from.

That's basically what I meant. As long as they don't base decisions on their religion.

This thread got off topic real fast.

Kanye West.

I would say by definition it is a failure of critical thinking if you are deeply religious. Also the judgement of what is good for the country may vary if you believe in a supreme being, be it biblical, quranical or some other. That is what i meant.

I don't believe in Big foot, but I'm not gonna hold it against a candidate who does so long as our policies are in sync. A person can believe in something outlandish and at the same time be rational.

In my humble opinion, politicians in general have it rough. Their lives are being looked at under a microscope, and they get next to zero privacy. Honestly, though, it's not the kind of life I'd choose for myself, but someone has to do it. And hopefully, someone will do it right again, someday.

As for the presidential candidates we have for 2016, I wouldn't vote for any of them. They all have views which, I personally believe, will be a detriment to the advancement and betterment of this country. More harm than good can be done, and has been done, many times, when people voted for the wrong candidates.

So, I'll wait for them to remove the limitations of having to be a Republican or a Democrat to run for president, because those kind of limitations only have a negative impact on what they are able to do for the country.

When those limitations are lifted, and anyone can run for president, regardless of political affiliation, I'll start voting in the presidential elections again.

I would likely vote for someone who doesn't let their actions be dictated by religion, political affiliation, business relations, lobbyists who gave them money, scandals, special interest bullshit, or anything not beneficial to the country and its people as a whole.

I would hope that someone starts helping to recover the lower income class from poverty, while not at the expense of other income classes, so that there's not as much of a ridiculous wage gap between lower and middle class, and that a single person can actually rent their own 2 bedroom apartment... alone.

Im going conservative. Don't like NDP, and Liberals while better, i don't like There stances on some key points.

For President, I like Trumps straightforwardness, and fire. But to me he does go a little far on some of his ideas.

I totally understand what you mean, but just me personally, i wouldn't be able to vote for somebody who believes in religious beings (or in the big foot). I just think it is too much of a irrational and illogical position to have, that i think it will effect his/her decision making in other areas as well.

Clinton is a no she is too shady. Trump might be good for the country in the sense he would manage it like a business and might help us economically, but he is also crazy and might do things to piss off to many people. Outside of those 2 right now there isn't one that jumps out at me as I should vote for them.

Hillary is a homophobe so uh, naw.

Trump is funny, I'll give him that.

I don't even live in the US of A so I'd vote for Kanye.

Is it naive to hope for a pure president? If so, its really sad how pureness ceases to exist within positions of power...

Not even Jesus was pure. Ghandi maybe..

Bush's IQ is estimated to be 138.5. Is there some sort of proof that correlates good presidency to high IQ's?


Ghandi was a notorious racist and a big creeper. Go read any of Christopher Hitchen's books/articles on him.



Why either of them? Clinton is an incompetent, lying politician who's broken the laws and acted like a malicious homophobic(she only changed her opinion on sex same messages because it's trendy and PC now) warhawk in the past. (she also blamed violence on video games in the past to, so quadruple fuck her)

Bernie on the other hand is a socialist democrat who hasn't picked up an economic's textbook in his life. Typical leftist policies include more gun control, increasing the debt, anti-free speech laws, and anti immigration rhetoric. My favorite stupid Bernie Sanders idea is that he wants to make it illegal for US corporations to manufacture goods abroad, and then sell those goods in the USA.

You're awfully misinformed about Bernie Sanders. This man is in politics for decades and knows about economics. He also happens to be an advocate of guns and supported pro-gun legislations in the past. His idea is closing tax loopholes and taxing the rich more to get money for his social projects. You can think what you want about that, but don't spread straight-up lies.

Just because someone has been in politics in decades doesn't make them economically literate, if anything, old established politicians are the worse kind of politicians. He has been on record for saying he wants to tax the upper 10% percent, thinking that that will somehow bring in more jobs and fund his 18.5 Trillion dollar spending plan.(FYI you can literally rob blind the 50% of all Americans and still not be closed to getting that much money). He's also wrong on things like increasing min. wage, with results being clearly visible in Seattle, with people cutting back hours, sometimes voluntarily so they'll still have a job and maybe still be in the earning range to receive benefits, and others already losing their jobs.

I do agree with him on several things, including getting rid of tax loopholes, auditing the Fed, and ending corporate welfare. I'm sure if I dug deeper I'd find more but that doesn't matter when you plan on taxing the biggest tax revenue source 90% already. He keeps yammering about the Scandinavia but even they have smaller tax rates for big business.

Interview with Bernie on Immigration:
https://reason.com/blog/2015/07/28/on-immigration-bernie-sanders-sounds-lik


And now compare it to Donald Trump's quote on immigration:


They both think that the demand for labor from American companies are somehow American only jobs, which is why Bernie is so eager to punish overseas manufactures.

On the other hand, although he has voted no on some gun control measures he's still has a history of voting yes on bans and regulations. NRA has him graded a F. (not that I agree with 100% of what the NRA says, but when it comes to gun legislation and proposals, they're usually on point when reporting it)
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm

[edit]

I will say this, I like him a lot more over Clinton. Although, with the house being under "Republican" control I don't see any of his economic endeavors to be successful (because intelligent producers and businesses love being taxed, so they'll let their money sit here and get taken). Not to mention I know not all independents and Democrats are on board with a lot of his plans.