Show Me Your Moves
Irradiated by LabRat
So I think it’s obvious I’m not going to get anything even remotely resembling what I want in a presidential candidate this year, but I thought it would be interesting to think about what sorts of skills or traits or displays I’d genuinely want to see in a candidate as opposed to what they all seem to think will appeal to voters.
Politicians do dearly love to strike poses in hard hats and trucks and with a shottie over their arm and god knows what else, to convince us they’re “one of us”, part of their ingroup. Guess what? Thanks to the way the American political system works at the national level (it applies to less and less degree the more local you get, but still applies), you need to be very rich and in possession of a lot of spare time to get anywhere. These guys are never going to be one of me even if we technically share a hobby or a general area of residence*. They live in a world that is stratospheres away from the one the vast majority of Americans do, and the nature of the job they’re applying for means they pretty much have to. I’m OK with that. I very broadly prefer some indication that a candidate has at least had some glancing contacts with the world I live in, but overall, I don’t give a damn if a candidate doesn’t know what end the bullets come out of and thinks the stock is the shoulder thing that goes up as long as he or she is not interested in banning them. In-group markers are out, period.
So what, besides the obvious agreement with my various political positions, would actually appeal to me and turn my head even if I disagreed with some or most of theirs? (Which, let’s face it, is going to happen anyway, given my positions.) What would actually demonstrate some form of respectable competency and, dare I say it, character?
1. The ability to teach a horse or dog at least one thing, without losing their temper. “Sit” or the equine equivalent would be too simple. How to walk nicely on a leash or long line would do well- convincing another critter that you’re worth following seems germane. Key point here is actually accomplishing the goal set out, with the critter’s full cooperation, without losing the temper and blaming the “student” or making excuses.
2. The ability to accurately and fairly describe the beliefs and structure of at least five faiths the candidate does not share.
3. The ability to accurately and fairly describe the logic and structure of at least five political positions the candidate is in direct opposition to.
4. The ability to speak on a relevant topic, intelligently, without a teleprompter and without changing the subject, for at least fifteen minutes straight. Optional bonus round- the ability to repeatedly hold town halls while adhering to these rules and without melting down.
5. The ability to pass a freshman economics final exam.
6. The ability to pass a greater-than-freshman level final exam in civics/American government.
7. The ability to hold and execute a successful bake sale, or similar event, using a staff of randomly selected people rather than his/her own supporters.
8. The ability to successfully convey a concept (any concept, but something from American law or government would be most germane) to a classroom of seventh graders.
9. The ability to listen to another candidate expound on a position they hold, that the candidate him or herself despises, for at least twenty minutes, without interrupting, and with an accurate and fair summary or distillation of what they said before responding.
10. The ability to successfully apply for, and pass any requirements not relating to residence, a driver’s license in another state, without handlers or any other help not available over the standard Motor Vehicle Department desk.
Any suggestions from the peanut gallery? Remember, the rules are that they be observable skills or tests that don’t relate either to your politics or to any identity affiliation, that would make you respect someone more as a person qualified as a candidate for any elected office.
*My personal all time favorite example of this phenomenon was Newt Gingrich trying to demagogue Mitt Romney on how much more super-mega-filthy-stupid rich he supposedly is compared to Newt, and therefore the loser in the populist game. Guess what, Newt? Only .5% of Americans are even capable of seeing a distinction between super-mega-filthy-stupid rich, and just super-mega-filthy rich, let alone caring.
ETA: SB7 took this and ran further with it. Good list, I particularly like the basic engineering test and the “cook a meal” test, which was echoed by Jennifer in the comments below as a more advanced dinner-party challenge. I also like the no-sleep bonus round.
February 22nd, 2012 at 5:20 pm
How about being able to accurately enumerate (without peeking) the duties of the President as stated in the Constitution?
The Bonus Round would be to explain the meaning of the Commerce Clause, as the Founders meant it, not as the government means it.
February 22nd, 2012 at 5:26 pm
I think maybe a freshman level world geography final exam might not be a bad thing either.
February 22nd, 2012 at 5:54 pm
Hahaha, Falcon Punch!
February 22nd, 2012 at 5:58 pm
Differential and integral calculus, at a very rough and intuitive level. I want a candidate who can talk about rates of change, changes in rates over time, and accumulation of quantities (area under the curve — hence integral calculus) rather than just the value of a given measurement at a single point in time. This might be covered by your ECON 101 final in point 5. Actually, we could cover it with point 8 as well: Anyone who can explain derivatives and integrals to a room full of twelve-year-olds in terms they can understand ought to know enough math, at a practical level, to be trusted not to fuck up an economy through sheer ignorance — and if they can limit themselves to grade 7 math they’re probably not the kind of quant who’s going to fuck up an economy through applied brilliance (Black-Scholes and the like).
February 22nd, 2012 at 6:33 pm
Before being allowed to even run for office they must start a small business and run it successfully for a year, without violating any Federal laws or regulations. During the year there shall be a visit by OSHA, a ADA attorney, and a review by the appropriate state license board.
Finally every April 15th they must sit down and fill out their tax forms without the assistance of a tax preparer or software. They can have up to 8 hours of time. The return will automatically be audited by the IRS and the results made part of the public record.
of course I doubt there are enough people who will be able to do this to completely fill congress so the number of Representatives and Senators will have to be decreased.
February 22nd, 2012 at 9:38 pm
Some level of provable competence in basic science, math (especially statistics), economics, and history would be nice.
February 22nd, 2012 at 9:40 pm
bluntobject,
I was going to push for the ability to explain basic Prob&Stats to a class of 12 year olds.
Including why lotteries are money-raising mechanisms, why a group of 26 people has approximately-even odds of containing two people who share a birthday, and why (or why not) a sample of 2000 people gives an approximate representation of the opinions of 120 million voters.
And maybe a short introduction to the mathematical assertion that no voting system will perfectly represent the desires of all voters in the election…but that’s not Prob&Stats, that’s Game Theory.
I do fear, though, that explaining algebra might be beyond the skills of most politicians.
February 23rd, 2012 at 3:44 am
I’d like them to be able to explain a few massively important events in world history to the same class of 12 year olds. That would include relevant lessons for our world today:
-The rise and fall of the Greek city states.
-The rise and fall of the Roman Empire.
-The Enlightenment, and how it has effected modern thought.
-The French Revolution and it’s effects.
-The causes of the First World War and it’s effects.
I don’t think we’re asking too much. After all, POTUS is one of the biggest jobs out there.
February 23rd, 2012 at 6:37 am
I would like them to be able to say, without embarrassment, “I don’t know the answer to that, but I will find out and get back to you.” And then actually follow through. Oh, and also to be able to say, “That sounds like an important issue for you, but I don’t see that it is any business of the Federal Government.”
February 23rd, 2012 at 6:56 am
I would like them to have the inability to claim with a straight face that reducing the rate of overspending the tax revenues actually counts as a “deficit reduction”.
But that one might violate the “doesn’t strictly appeal to my personal politics” rule, too.
February 23rd, 2012 at 7:56 am
The ability to describe the difference between the term “theory” as used in casual conversation and as used in science.
The full understanding that, no matter how wonderful and true they think their belief system is, it is not their duty to make everybody else live by it.
February 23rd, 2012 at 8:20 am
All of the above? I would add a course or two on historical research methodology, otherwise known as: ‘All history, all political science, and all journalism is biased; and this is why.’
Actually, I would require them to drive through every state in the Union. They would have to do it by themselves, without a support staff nor anyone else with them, and they could not take the interstates. They could not campaign nor meet with anyone of whom even local newspapers would take note; they would simply have to observe in silent anonymity. (not a practical requirement, I know)
February 23rd, 2012 at 8:33 am
While we’re fantasizing, the candidate should obtain, through regular channels, a CHL in his/her home state.
Video of said candidate attending a class at Gunsite or similar (hell, an NRA basic pistol class would work) would also be nice
While we’re fantasizing.
February 23rd, 2012 at 8:52 am
They should be able to host a successful dinner party. They should plan and personally prepare a meal that will satisfy the guest list taking allergy and religious accommodations into account. They should be able to navigate the small talk and have meaningful conversations with the everyone in attendance. And then they should be able to clean up after. They do not get a kitchen or wait staff for this event. They can have one assistant who must be either their spouse or the VP.
February 23rd, 2012 at 11:27 am
#3 is huge.
I see a lot of people, in various places, speaking and acting in ways that make it clear that they have no idea whatsoever about the actual beliefs and mindset of the people they consider The Enemy.
This makes for all manner of problems; not only does it lead to much more “Enemy” than is probably justified, but even when it is justified, it leads to ineffective opposition.
February 23rd, 2012 at 3:11 pm
My test would involve actually doing things. Can he/she take raw materials and make something useful out of them? I would even accept something artistic if it was really good and showed some skill, i.e. whittling a dog tearing a bird apart out of a bar of soap with a pocket knife.
February 23rd, 2012 at 4:16 pm
I would consider the ability to kill a bear with one’s own hands to be a bonus, possibly overshadowing a few of the other points.
February 24th, 2012 at 5:41 am
Gnarly Sheen: Davy Crockett for president!
February 24th, 2012 at 9:51 am
Way late to this but Jennifer’s suggestion would be mine as well. During my in-head edit I included a $100 limit, four persons and appropriate wine/beer pairing as additional requirements.
February 25th, 2012 at 3:20 am
The ability to survive for six months on the current poverty-line income, earned through a retail, food service or similar job. Because I am merciful, I’m not making them look for the job, but if they get fired it’s all on them.
Explain at least six different ways to lie with statistics. Show a basic understanding of the concepts of “confounding variable,” “correlation does not equal causation,” “sample size,” “outlier,” and “the scientific method.” Pass a basic math test.
Know what the Milgram experiments and the Stanford Prison experiment are.
Name five cognitive biases and at least one time they have had each particular bias. Saying that you have never had a cognitive bias automatically makes you disqualified from the presidency.
Have genuinely changed their mind to a position better-supported by the evidence. Bonus points if it’s a less popular position.
February 27th, 2012 at 5:45 pm
I may not be very good at thinkin/talking on my feet, but can pass the “cook a meal” test. The cooking Merit Badge is required for Eagle.
Hmm, how many of them are Eagle Scouts? Boy Scouts, like sojers, are taught to take their Oaths seriously. Yes, Barry Soetoro is obviously an Oath-breaker. Most of ‘em are, he’s just more egregiously shameless about it.