Trumpled (Alternative Leading)

[PaulP]

Waiting for a blemish-free politician that ticks all the boxes is like waiting by the side of a river for a fish to magically fly into your mouth. Nevertheless, there are limits and there are thresholds beyond which no politician should pass, and IMO both of these men have long passed those thresholds. In any sane, just world, these guys would be lucky to be janitors in the White House, let alone President.

Neither are deserving of even 1 vote, but they don't play by the same rules. Biden is a standard political apparatchik in a corporate sponsored duopoly. Trump more closely resembles a cartoonish, buffoonish character from a majority country, more cult leader than a Western politician in the true sense of the concept. 

[ElwoodBlues1]

Now he has backed his Vice President Trump.

That cracked me up. ?

[DJC]

Waiting for a blemish-free politician that ticks all the boxes is like waiting by the side of a river for a fish to magically fly into your mouth. Nevertheless, there are limits and there are thresholds beyond which no politician should pass, and IMO both of these men have long passed those thresholds. In any sane, just world, these guys would be lucky to be janitors in the White House, let alone President.

Neither are deserving of even 1 vote, but they don't play by the same rules. Biden is a standard political apparatchik in a corporate sponsored duopoly. Trump more closely resembles a cartoonish, buffoonish character from a majority country, more cult leader than a Western politician in the true sense of the concept.

You’re too charitable Paul; neither of them are fit, mentally, physically and morally, to run a chook raffle.

[Baggers]

You’re too charitable Paul; neither of them are fit, mentally, physically and morally, to run a chook raffle.

Run a chook raffle? Now you're being too charitable, David    ;D ...I wouldn't trust either of them to participate effectively in an egg and spoon race! Or to even understand the rules!

[Thryleon]

Run a chook raffle? Now you're being too charitable, David    ;D ...I wouldn't trust either of them to participate effectively in an egg and spoon race! Or to even understand the rules!

well Trump wouldn't play by the rules and Biden might need someone to show him which way to run his race...

Ultimately politicians under 35 and over 55 are unfit to lead the nation. 

[DJC]

well Trump wouldn't play by the rules and Biden might need someone to show him which way to run his race...

Ultimately politicians under 35 and over 55 are unfit to lead the nation.

I’m not sure that you can set age limits on leadership;  Alexander the Great was 20 when he succeeded Phillip and Winston Churchill was in his late 60s when he guided the Allies to victory in the Second World War.

It’s more about ability or capacity than age.

[Thryleon]

I’m not sure that you can set age limits on leadership;  Alexander the Great was 20 when he succeeded Phillip and Winston Churchill was in his late 60s when he guided the Allies to victory in the Second World War.

It’s more about ability or capacity than age.

I disagree.

Those would be outliers not the rule. 

Under 35 doesn't know enough about life and over 55 are too disconnected from the plight of the younger types.  It's just too disconnected.  It doesn't have to be hard and fast but you go outside those ages my rule would apply more often than your exceptions.  I'm 41.  The kids I work with have remarkably different challenges to mine when I was their age, but I can relate better to them than most people aged 20 years older than me.  Most people of that era are too caught up in outdated modes of thinking that aren't so relevant either. 

Before anyone calls this ageist, have a think about how we lived 30 years ago.  Supermarkets closed at midday Sunday, we only had free to air TV.  The internet was dial up if you had it at all.  Windows 95 wasn't out, kernahan was our captain.

30 years is a long time.  Have a look at what property prices have done in that time. 

The world is a very different place and whilst some people are connected to it, most aren't.  There's a huge divide.  You want to be happier about it, trim it down to 30 and make it 60, but beyond that is way too out of touch. 

[ElwoodBlues1]

The world story on leaders and their age...
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/...d-leaders/

The Average age of Congress is 58 and the Senate is 64 years of age.....

[DJC]

I disagree.

Those would be outliers not the rule. 

Under 35 doesn't know enough about life and over 55 are too disconnected from the plight of the younger types.  It's just too disconnected.  It doesn't have to be hard and fast but you go outside those ages my rule would apply more often than your exceptions.  I'm 41.  The kids I work with have remarkably different challenges to mine when I was their age, but I can relate better to them than most people aged 20 years older than me.  Most people of that era are too caught up in outdated modes of thinking that aren't so relevant either. 

Before anyone calls this ageist, have a think about how we lived 30 years ago.  Supermarkets closed at midday Sunday, we only had free to air TV.  The internet was dial up if you had it at all.  Windows 95 wasn't out, kernahan was our captain.

30 years is a long time.  Have a look at what property prices have done in that time. 

The world is a very different place and whilst some people are connected to it, most aren't.  There's a huge divide.  You want to be happier about it, trim it down to 30 and make it 60, but beyond that is way too out of touch.

No, they’re not outliers.  Golda Meir was 71 when she became Israel’s PM, Indira Gandhi was 63 when she began her second stint as India’s PM, Margaret Thatcher was 54 when she became UK’s PM, Charles de Gaulle was 68 when elected as France’s President, Fidel Castro was 33 when he became Cuba’s PM, Xi Jinping is 73, William Pitt the younger was UK PM at 24, Queen Elizabeth was 96, Pope Francis is 87, Gabriel Attal was France’s PM at 35, Kim Jong Un became North Korea’s supreme leader at 29, and there are so many more leaders, good and bad, outside your age range.

Age is largely irrelevant to leadership.  Intelligence, principles, decisiveness, morality, knowledge, ruthlessness, compassion, etc are far more important.

[Lods]

It’s an interesting debate. My own personal experience tends to make me lean a bit to Thry’s side that there is a “best before.” date in all of us.

I retired at 60. I found the last five years probably the hardest. I still enjoyed what I did but the energy just wasn’t there, and I found things a lot more challenging. Strangely that was a period where others looked to me for advice and direction. I regard my best years as between the ages 30 and 50.
The young have the energy and enthusiasm, the old have the age and experience, and it’s no doubt somewhere in the middle where they hit their peak. The young tend to live in the moment. Their focus is what is happening at any given time. At the end of my career, I could look at the day ahead and knew exactly what parts of that day would present challenges and how I would deal with those. The thing is that 10 years after retiring I know I couldn’t do that same job.

Looking at the list of elder statesfolk DJC posted, the questions would have to be -
Were they in their prime when held those positions?
Were they still the best person for that job?
Would a 50-year-old Biden be a better President than the 80+ version.

The answer to the first question would undoubtedly be ‘no’
The answer to the second is ‘debatable’.
The answer to the third would be odds-on.

Aging is something we can’t beat. Biden is not as sharp as he was 4 years ago. In four year’s time he will be less sharp…and Harris would probably be President.

Is Biden of better character than Trump? Undoubtedly! His interests seem to be of what’s best for his country and the world whereas Trump is always about what’s best for Trump. In a bit of a contradiction, by hanging on Biden is probably committing a bit of a selfish act.  He’s also a politician of many years experience and you don’t last that long in politics without a bit of mongrel and ruthlessness…and while no Trump, there would be a few skeletons in his closet.

So where are we at now.
At the Press Conference he made a few gaffs. The Trump for Harris was a big blooper, much the same as calling Zelensky- Putin earlier in the day. But his performance at the presser, while not great, and very hesitant at times, was better than his debate performance and not the clear sign of the lost cause some Democrats calling for him to step down would have been able to seize upon to justify their positions. He was able to demonstrate he was still across a number of important issues.
Just as an aside…notice when Biden loses his train of thought he says ‘Anyway’ and changes the subject.

All that leaves the party in a bit of limbo.
Time is running out. If a change is to be made it has to be made shortly. If Biden does run he is staring at defeat. He would also go to an election with a party divided. A party where many of his colleagues think he shouldn’t be running. That gives the other side a ton of ammunition. A divided party is a recipe for defeat.