What You See is What You Get in Presidential Candidates

U.S.A. Electing Underqualified Presidents Deserves What it Gets (Debt, Crisis, Eco-Decline etc.)

Presidents Eisenhower and Reagan were the last two fully qualified nationally integrated Presidents. Each was well known and their political ideas published before taking office. The nation knew what to expect from each individual. In recent years the nation has elected local governors or state politicians promoted too rapidly.

Presidents Obama, Bush, Clinton or Carter hadn't a well-developed public economic and environmental platform in which they worked for several years before running for office. If the public simply elects any modestly articulate candidate able to read a teleprompter, a candidate that has not given serious though to development of actual economic and ecological policy that works for many years—they get an unknown untested President happy just to be President. Such Presidents may not really be up to the task of national leadership.

George H.W. Bush was a phi beta kappa in economics and famous for calling Reaganomics 'voodoo economics'. We find other flaws in President Bush I besides economics, that might have faded in to history without too much problem if not followed up with Clintonomics as the actualizer of 'The New World Order'. The protracted rush to concentrate wealth for global financial elites and to liquidate U.S. nationalism and home owning security led down disastrous courses that have yet to play out.

Richard Nixon was brilliant yet flawed—and could not get elected to the U.S. Senate in California. Though he levered his way onto the Eisenhower administration with that Checker’s speech, he was far less public and known over time before taking office Ronald Regan who as a Democrat supported Eisenhower in the 1952 and 1956 Presidential campaigns.

The nation knew much about Ronald Reagan before he took office, and his job performance was basically as expected. Even the Ayatollah Khomeini had an idea what to expect and released the U.S. hostages inauguration day.

I write this article to point out that in the 2012 election the nation is again likely to elect an underqualified candidate without a history of experience in ecological economic affairs of a national and global level, nor of military experience. The next President at best will be another under qualified MBA or governor seeking to promote themselves to the top job—while the nation expects nothing new from their next President except vaguely that he or she would do better in economics. We the people would expect pompous speeches about taxation levels and various kinds of spending, lots of blame and nothing in the way of proven macro-economic competence by the candidate.

It would be a fine thing if several PhDs in economics and ecology with a background as an LT or Captain in the military fought for the nomination every four years. We would like to see candidates run that aren’t simply maximally over-promoted as examples of the American way of perpetual revolution against the citizens that have lived here for a generation or three as if they all were old money and inertially supporters of globalism. Americans expect little and get little from its Presidents. Like the military, a President will perform as they train. If a candidate hasn’t got a real competent plan for reforming and correcting the economy before the campaign, it isn’t likely to be effective if actualized.

As in testing scientific theories, political theories of how to reconstruct or change the economy should be tested substantially before being implemented. That was a major flaw of the Bush II plan to reconstruct Iraq post war for approximately 5 billion dollars. President Obama is confident that his Frankenstinean resuscitation of the Clinton era economy policy with reforms will get the economy going in the right direction under supervision of Clintonista economic advisers, yet some of us believe that a non-sustainable, ad hoc globalist based economic policy is implicitly harmful and likely to crash the economy worse that presently at some point in the future.