Also John Kasich and Paul Ryan. Kasich is, by current Republican standards, a moderate. Ryan…hmm. I can’t say. I know he has a libertarian bent but that’s about all I know of him.
I get the sense that neither can stand the evangelical faction of the Republican electorate and that’s refreshing by itself. Shortly after the Supreme Court ruling on Obergefell v Hodges, Kasich went on record saying he doesn’t personally support marriage equality but that since this is now the law of the land, government employees have to do their job and abide by that law.
Pushing aside his conservative views, that’s the kind of person you want in the executive branch.
Well, I thought that - at least in Trump’s case - the debates gave an excellent insight into how he’d govern. Can you imagine just how dysfunctional cabinet meetings would be with him in charge. Talking over people, blurting out "wrong!’ at random intervals, ignoring anyone not sufficiently sycophantic, and so on.
That’s probably a great way to rule a company which you aim to bankrupt (and, let’s be fair, he does have a lot of relevant experience there), but it strikes me as a terrible way to run a country.
Kasich attends St. Augustine Anglican Church, in Westerville, Ohio
I know someone who grew up in Westerville and she described it as a very uptight, right-wing, religious community. She got the hell out of there as soon as she graduated high school.
I’d argue that a politician who can’t present their ideas in a convincing way won’t be able to govern effectively in any case. A good deal of the President’s power comes from his or her ability to convince others (congress, world leaders, adversaries, the voting public) that they and their ideas should be taken seriously. Teddy Roosevelt coined the term “Bully Pulpit” to describe the office of the Presidency (back when “bully” meant something quite different).
I doubt that in 40+ years of business he was ever once in a boardroom where people weren’t kissing his arse and rolling over for him. Which, despite the reality-TV version he presented to the public, is not how real board meetings at serious organisations go.
And from the poll results, the most insane of his voting bloc didn’t care, but it did affect those persons who live in the same reality as the rest of us.
I’m not crazy about her answers on the emails (though I also don’t have a problem with her using a private server), but the Clinton Foundation is quite a good and admirable organization. If I ever have a family foundation to coordinate charitable giving it will be a model.
I get the feeling that the attacks on the Clinton Foundation were motivated by trying to turn a strength into a weakness or at least something that draws enough negative attention (no matter how warranted/unwarranted) that it’s a risk to bring up. Sort of like the attacks on Gore “inventing the Internet” turned around his massive accomplishments as a senator in expanding ARPANET and opening the Internet to public use.
See also: decorated Vietnam war veteran John Kerry put on the defensive over his service record by an opponent who used family connections to get a cushy position in the National Guard.
