Thread: The Return of Ronald Reagan?

Now I am not a politician, and I don't really like politics. But as I see some questionable figures arise for the leadership of our country, I cant help but feel somewhat concerned.

So I thought of something. A unique republican ticket that might result in the return of senses and status in the world for the USA. There has been something missing from politics recently. Too much new stuff...to much rapid change. Now moving forward is never a bad thing...but moving forward too fast is a recipe for disaster.

And this isn't a knock on President Obama. Although I disagree with him on many issues I respect him at the end of the day because he is a politician doing what politicians do. But there is some despising along with the respect, for the same reason. That being that he is a politician, and he has been used of his party to further agendas that I feel he himself doesn't personally endorse.

And that is where you must make a stand as President. If deep down you don't agree with something.....then make a stand. Now, of course, all Presidents have towed the party line, but when it comes to the highest critical and moral issues the party line should become meaningless.

Thus failure to make a stand on one or two issues makes one appear to be nothing more than a puppet, figuratively and.....literally!

Thus all the talk of change, and all of the hope that a President having a different ethnicity was supposed to bring....,,is revealed as bogus! Therefore all of those of the same ethnicity, as well as the new younger voting generation, are slowly beginning to see themselves as fooled. And fooled because the same hand must be controlling things, and the President might really not be calling any shots.

But, really, hasn't that always been the case?

So since it always was the case I figure going back to what actually works, with a few better twists of change might make the difference. Of course I do not speak for these men, but my dream 2016 ticket consists of these two men.

PETER UEBERROTH & BOBBY JINDAL

This republican ticket would work wonders. First off Peter Ueberroth has experience on the world stage from back in the 1984 Olympics. He showed mastery of budgeting and making the impossible happen. His feats with the L.A. Olympics were every bit as wondorous as any task that could be asked of a President. Plus he would bring to Jindal the "feel" and "spirit" of the 1980's.

Peter Ueberroth would be my choice for President and Bobby Jindal for Vice President.

But this is a strategic selection. Ueberroth could opt to groom Jindal for 4 years and step out of the way for the 2020 Presidency...for which Jindal should win and secure 8 years for the Republicans. Keep in mind that Ueberroth performed best in the 4 year Olympic cycle. But what he could do in those 4 year could get us back on track. This would be his specialty and purpose at his advanced age...but it is a great strategy, and one never before considered.

Then with Jindal as Vice and then President in 2020 would do well for foreign policy matters as well as the world stage. Jindal is of India descent, but he is thoroughly American. Thus he would be a standard on the world stage of just how great a assimilated American can be. And he definitely would be a trustworthy President.....unlike those that, for whatever reason, parties agendas appear to be hell bent on weakening this country.

Now of course this is highly unlikely to happen. But if those two men got together it just might work. The campaign logo would even be cool.



Ueberroth - Jindal 2016
"Wouldn't that be great"







Then is 2020 with a Paul Ryan being a little more seasoned, I can see him as a running mate for Jindal

JINDAL-RYAN 2020
"Perfect Sight!"

I dunno, Mach. I actually might be inclined to agree with you....Or not.
Point is, Politics seem to cause issues as we have guys here from many walks of life and from all over the world.
We gravitate to this forum (I hope!) to talk of straight-shaving and this subforum is for the occasional discussion of other subjects. Religion, Race, Politics sometimes cause issues. Something to think about!
Regards,
Tom

Every politician who takes contributions from anyone is someone who shouldn't be in office. They should work for the people not their contributors.

All Presidents puppets ? Yeah, since Kennedy. Ross Perot was talking mass amounts of sense back in the day and when it actually looked like his own money and common sense was going to get him in the lead,,,,, he stopped. Does anyone remember why ? He made the statement right on live TV and that was the only time you could have heard it. In more graceful and extended version he said the lives of members of his family were being threatened. He scoffed at threats against him but could not ignore and would not put his family through that kind of ordeal.

Politics is a horse and pony show you watch and believe is real. If you do believe it's real your not paying attention to the details. No, I do not mean Alex Jones and the like. I mean look and think for yourself. It's not a hopeless situation but it is going to take a disaster to change anything. Only then will people have 1 common cause to rally around. Only then will people look at each other with understanding and compassion. If you take sides you are part of the problem. Sorry, that's just my view of what the basic problem is. The world does not discuss and respect each other like we do in this forum. The countries moderators are only concerned about their own personal wealth and views of how things should be. If you back them you are them :<0)

HAR!

All political offices should be once and done, with a lifetime ban on lobbying. Do your job the best you can full time because there won't be a reelection and then go back and live under what you wrought!

We have the technology available to implement a full direct democracy, I don't see why we should even bother with career politicians and the associated costs.

Toughest subject ever, only Religion sparks more ill feeling and anger. Even among professors in a collage, opinions will very. I personally am not a fan of Reagan nor the Bush's but the other two have been no better and both houses have been useless during these times as well. Remember, for every opinion you have whether right or wrong, someone with have an opposite opinion. So why would anyone wish to take a job where everyone is trusting you to make the right decision? How do you make the right decision? What if you do not play ball with lobbyist and you loose that new plant? The system is flawed but it does work from time to time. As for who runs for office next election, it really will make no difference. Both parties will nominate new mouth pieces! The time is not right for a totally new outlook on politics. If you look at the past, it has only changed a few time is our history, and I personally do not see anything that points to that change. As for why it isn't a Direct Democracy, there is a reason why it isn't. Look up why and you will see.

I know why there aren't more direct democracies. However, I fail to see how the bogeyman of "tyranny of the majority" is worse than the current reality of "tyranny of the minority with the money to buy the elected".

I grew up in a family containing several career politicians, I was very active in local politics as a teen and a young adult, I worked for 6 years inside a very large democratic institution. I have seen first hand what the political system does to new members. I've seen lobbyists from mega corporations latching on to people as they crossed the doors of the elected office, and those were the slow lobbyists. I don't expect any politician reaching the national stage to be anything other than a mouthpiece for the oligarchy, they'll be shaped or discarded before getting a shot at nomination.

For what it is worth, I don't think the framers of the modern democracies envisioned the robber barons, corporations large enough to buy elected representatives or banks "too big to fail".

Originally Posted by JazzWillie

Every politician who takes contributions from anyone is someone who shouldn't be in office. They should work for the people not their contributors.

That. Folks forget Reagan was equal-left of Obama in his day as president of the Screen Actors Guild. Big-money made him a better offer (General Electric, big ag and oil) of the Governor's Mansion and, subsequently, the White House. Ron was not without charm but he was not without obligations to do a lot of looking the other way, either. Reagan served up Dole and, indirectly, Gingrich, both of whom, for better of worse, presided over the end of a fuctional bicameral democracy in the US. Jindal is a dust bunny. The right needs gravitas. I'm sure Newt will be remarried, reinvented, reconsecrated and ready to re-save the world by 2016.