What makes a great politician?

[David Lockmiller]

The Guardian reported today (January 15, 2018) the following Trump statement (and there is a video):

As Trump headed to dinner at his golf club in Florida on Sunday, he was confronted by a reporter: “What do you say to people who say you’re a racist?”

The president said: “No, no, I’m not a racist. I am the least racist person you have ever interviewed, that I can tell you.”

For those who may be interested in the accuracy of this statement by the President of the United States, I would suggest reading the following well-documented opinion piece that was published in today’s (January 15, 2018) New York Times: Donald Trump’s Racism - The Definitive List.

I thought one of the more interesting parts of this “definitive” list, was the section labeled “Denigrating Native Americans” and in particular the following two paragraphs:

In a 1993 radio interview, he suggested that Native Americans in Connecticut were faking their ancestry. “I think I might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians that are trying to open up the reservations.”

In a November 2017 meeting with Navajo veterans of World War II, Trump mocked Senator Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas.”

I think an appropriate Indian name for the sitting President of the United States, who believes that he “might have more Indian blood than a lot of the so-called Indians,” would be “Sitting Bull.”

This New York Times opinion piece itself has a hyperlink reference to an October, 2016 New York Times article titled “Why Trump Doubled Down on the Central Park Five.”

According to this article, in 1989, Donald Trump spent $85,000 for full-page ads in four New York newspapers, urging the death penalty for five black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a white woman in Central Park. There is a copy of the 1989 ad in the hyperlink New York Times opinion piece referenced above.

In October 2016, a month before the presidential election, Republican Presidential candidate Trump argued once again in an interview with CNN that the convicted young men were guilty. However, this Trump interview with CNN took place 14 years after the sentences of the Central Park Five were vacated, based on DNA evidence and the detailed and accurate confession of a serial rapist named Matias Reyes.

In the month following this CNN interview, Donald J. Trump was elected President of the United States.

[L Verge]

David - I get the sneaking suspicion that you are a Trump-hater, and I can live with that even though I would like our country to move on to much more important topics - and things that require our elected members of Congress to work on (which many seem not inclined to do).

However, I believe we started this thread with a rather innocent question as to what makes a good leader, with the emphasis on traits that many consider derive from Lincoln's qualities. Can we get back to the main historical point? And may I remind folks that there was just as much spewing of hatred about Lincoln as President as what we see today. History does repeat itself, and our nation does survive - sometimes miraculously.

[AussieMick]

Thanks, Laurie, you're absolutely correct (our mutual admiration knows no bounds). I was beginning to think I shouldnt have started the Thread. I would prefer people to consider all politicians and all nations. Obviously that might involve some debates of specific people ... but hopefully without going into endless disagreements and bringing in new side issues.

I see on the internet Business Insiders website that Lincoln is still classed as the greatest president.
I'd agree.

Business Insiders 20 Greatest Presidents

I do though disagree with the various 'qualities' that they used to grade the presidents...
"Public persuasion, crisis leadership, economic management, moral authority, international relations, administrative skills, relations with congress, vision, pursued equal justice for all, and performance within the context of his times."

I still consider the choice of colleagues/cabinet to be a prime criteria. That comes also under the criteria 'Administrative skills' ... but its more than that. It includes being able to recognise people's strengths and weaknesses. Someone else here (Sorry, I forget who and havent searched) mentioned Humility and I'd agree ... its just that its such a difficult one to assess from a proven basis. Vision is a little waffley and can be easy to fake. 'Relations with congress' is obviously US based but I'd go with anything similar that means achieving practical and realistic objectives whilst working with diverse competing people .

Many of the criteria in the Business Insiders are too hazy (and, yes my favourite word, 'waffley').

I also think that a leader must be able to make decisions. That means knowing when to make a decision and when *not* to make a decision. It includes being able to change course or even making a decision that is the reverse of a previous one (Anybody here ever gone for a drive and got lost ... and refused to backtrack?). I'd give Lincoln a 10 on this.

Napoleon said something like he wanted generals that were 'lucky'. I think a great leader makes his/her own luck. And (what did Lincoln say about following events?) has to take advantage of events when possible whilst dealing with setbacks ("Risk Management" in modern business I guess).

Most important (being a member of Toastmasters) I have to say Communication Skills are essential.

Finally (and I hesitate because I dont want to cause arguments) ... perhaps there is a need to consider the negatives. What are the faults and weaknesses that we do not want a great leader to have ? I'll create a new thread for that.

[David Lockmiller]

(01-15-2018 06:51 PM)L Verge Wrote:  David - I get the sneaking suspicion that you are a Trump-hater, and I can live with that even though I would like our country to move on to much more important topics - and things that require our elected members of Congress to work on (which many seem not inclined to do).

However, I believe we started this thread with a rather innocent question as to what makes a good leader, with the emphasis on traits that many consider derive from Lincoln's qualities. Can we get back to the main historical point? And may I remind folks that there was just as much spewing of hatred about Lincoln as President as what we see today. History does repeat itself, and our nation does survive - sometimes miraculously.

I believe that the question was: What makes a great politician?

I should like to point out that Donald Trump, with no previous political experience, won the Republican Party nomination over several well-known Republican politicians also vying for the nomination. And, then, he won the election for President over the Democratic Party nominee for President who was supposed to be, almost by acclamation, the first female President of the United States. The presidential election was not even close in the electoral vote.

If you believe the question has been answered in this thread as to what made Donald J. Trump a great politician in 2016, I must confess that I missed that post or those posts.

As to your "sneaking suspicion" that I am a Trump hater, I must also confess that I supported wholeheartedly the presidential aspirations of Senator Bernie Sanders.

I attended two rallies for Bernie Sanders -- in Oakland, Ca on my birthday May 30 and in San Francisco on June 6. I took a number of photographs at both locations and made photographic collage posters. I sent the 2 posters by Fed Ex to his campaign office in Vermont along with a letter stating my support of his campaign; I never got a response.

After the presidential election, Bernie Sanders came to San Francisco to support San Francisco Supervisor Jane Kim in her run for the state Senate. I went to the rally at Kim's campaign headquarters and as he was making his way to a car for his next appearance, I handed him copies of the same two posters. At first, he was hesitant to accept the rolled up posters and he asked what it was. I informed him that it was a photo collage of his appearance at his campaign rally of June 6. [That day of June 6, 2016 could not have been very pleasant for him because AP published a report before his speech that night that enough super-delegates had just declared their support for Hillary Clinton that she had won the Democratic Party nomination. The now meaningless California primary was held the next day, June 7.] Senator Sanders took the photo collages, flashed that beautiful smile of his to me in thanks, and got into the car and drove away. It made me feel good.

The New York Times Editorial Board endorsed Hillary Clinton for President on January 1, 2016. The New York Times Editorial Board, the columnists, and reporters all wrote in support of Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders for the nomination of the Democratic Party. And, most of the New York Times readers, especially influential women, were for Hillary Clinton. I wrote so many counter comments to all of this biased reporting and Clinton supporter comments that you would not believe it if I were able to show all of them to you. Many times, the comment reviewers would not even post my comments or waited until just before the close of comments to do so (when most readers had passed on to other stories). Only Paul Krugman (who referred to Bernie supporters like myself as Bernie Bro cult members) would consistently permit my comments in opposition to what he had written in his columns.

You may remember that all of the national polls had Senator Bernie Sanders winning over Donald Trump by significant margins. But that did not matter because the vast majority of the Democratic Party superdelegates had been sewed up by Hillary Clinton before the first primary had been held and New York refused to change its primary voting laws to permit the state's 3 million Independents to vote for Bernie. So, Hillary Clinton became the Democratic Party nominee for President and the rest is history.

I was just thinking earlier today what a sorry mistake (really two) that I had made on election day. I worked that day as an election worker here in San Francisco. I had intended to write in Bernie Sanders name for President when I voted but I falsely learned several days before that write-in's were not permitted any longer in California. So, when I voted myself, I left the Presidential vote blank [it did not matter in California which was a solid Democratic state that Hillary won by 3 million votes over Trump as I recall].

But this was not the very sorry mistake that I made that day. We switched roles on the election desk throughout the day and a young lady came into vote wearing a Bernie Sanders sweatshirt when I was the greeter and the person who checked the voter rolls. I wanted to tell her that I was also a Bernie Sanders supporter, but I thought that would be inappropriate and did not do so. She asked if she could vote for Bernie Sanders and I told her "no." We were so busy getting the polling place open in time that I failed to read one of the papers handed to me by the man in charge. It turns out that Bernie Sanders' name could be written in for President; he had qualified specifically as an acceptable write-in. This was a revelation to me the next day when I read the paper. I have thought about that young lady a number of times since that day. I wish that I could at lease apologize to her personally for that mistake.

The poll workers worked late into the night of the election. One of the other workers checked her phone and learned that Trump was either winning be a large margin or had already won. We were all dumbfounded.

So, the question remains: What made Donald Trump a great politician?

It sure as H*** wasn't honesty! Readers may recall that Abraham Lincoln was referred to as Honest Abe both before and after his election (in fact, to this day) and that is one of the primary reasons that he was a great politician . . . because he could be trusted as President. The Washington Post recently reported that as of Jan. 10 (after less than a year in office), President Trump has made 2,001 false or misleading claims since taking office. I think that the number of Americans who would refer to Donald Trump as being honest could be counted on the fingers of one hand, and that includes his wife and, of course, Mike Pense. So, all he needs is two more (maybe Cotton and Perdue would also call him Honest Donald Trump).

[My Name Is Kate]

I sure hope you aren't going to be the next James Hodgkinson... You have been warned in a previous post not to trust the mainstream media, yet you keep relying on dishonest sources for your information. I honestly think it wouldn't be a bad idea to report you to the FBI. Your irrational hatred is over the top.

[AussieMick]

Umm, please (everybody) ... can you take a breath? Pause. Look at the topic title. And make every post relevant to that? IMO, its far too early to be discussing Pres Trump's greatness one way or the other. If you want to refer to him in depth, then I suggest you try to create your own Thread (not destroy mine).

[RJNorton]

(01-16-2018 04:14 AM)AussieMick Wrote:  Umm, please (everybody) ... can you take a breath? Pause. Look at the topic title. And make every post relevant to that? IMO, its far too early to be discussing Pres Trump's greatness one way or the other. If you want to refer to him in depth, then I suggest you try to create your own Thread (not destroy mine).

I am sorry, Michael, but we're not going to have a thread on this forum devoted exclusively to President Trump. I am going to close this thread for now and direct folks here and ask people to stick to the topic of dead politicians.