Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Just a reminder!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Northeast Stinger" data-source="post: 209769" data-attributes="member: 1640"><p>O.K.</p><p></p><p>It does raise an interesting philosophical and ethical question. The old cliche is that a politician's first job is to get elected. Often we say we want a candidate who tells the truth, shoots straight and does not compromise his own integrity just to get elected. But the reality is that you can't make changes in government unless you get in office and most candidates will say and do whatever they have to in order to get into position to win. The good ones just do this smoothly without getting caught. Is this wrong? Is it a hard and fast line that one crosses as a candidate or is it a vague and blurry line? Candidates can run campaigns in which they promise to never compromise but these candidates, from my experience, don't get elected if they hue to that rule and they just end up fading into the sunset without having accomplished any kind of change or reform. I am just talking out loud here, not advocating a position.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand a candidate who is too ready to adapt to his audience and too willing to compromise may also have problems. A certain governor from Wisconsin named Walker went to Great Britain in preparation for a presidential bid. His hosts asked him on camera if he believed in evolution. He apparently was worried how his base might hear his answer as well as worried how his answer might get portrayed by the American news media. No matter how many ways they asked the question he politely refused to answer. It became humorous at one point as both guest and hosts began to laugh about how a simple question about evolution was considered too risky to answer if he wanted to run for President. Needless to say, his Great Britain trip generally left people so unimpressed with his leadership abilities that he has disappeared from the national political landscape.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Northeast Stinger, post: 209769, member: 1640"] O.K. It does raise an interesting philosophical and ethical question. The old cliche is that a politician's first job is to get elected. Often we say we want a candidate who tells the truth, shoots straight and does not compromise his own integrity just to get elected. But the reality is that you can't make changes in government unless you get in office and most candidates will say and do whatever they have to in order to get into position to win. The good ones just do this smoothly without getting caught. Is this wrong? Is it a hard and fast line that one crosses as a candidate or is it a vague and blurry line? Candidates can run campaigns in which they promise to never compromise but these candidates, from my experience, don't get elected if they hue to that rule and they just end up fading into the sunset without having accomplished any kind of change or reform. I am just talking out loud here, not advocating a position. On the other hand a candidate who is too ready to adapt to his audience and too willing to compromise may also have problems. A certain governor from Wisconsin named Walker went to Great Britain in preparation for a presidential bid. His hosts asked him on camera if he believed in evolution. He apparently was worried how his base might hear his answer as well as worried how his answer might get portrayed by the American news media. No matter how many ways they asked the question he politely refused to answer. It became humorous at one point as both guest and hosts began to laugh about how a simple question about evolution was considered too risky to answer if he wanted to run for President. Needless to say, his Great Britain trip generally left people so unimpressed with his leadership abilities that he has disappeared from the national political landscape. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who made "The Leap" to defeat u(sic)GA in COFH 2016?
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
Just a reminder!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top