WHICH OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IS MOST PRESIDENTIAL?

Seal of the President of the United States of America (from here)
Seal of the President of the United States of America (from here)

What is presidential? The definition of the term doesn’t tell us much.

presidential adjective

1. of or relating to a president or presidency.
2. of the nature of a president.

But consider how we use the term. Don’t we generally expect the term to refer to an honorable, dignified, highly competent leader?

With the term “presidential” in mind, let’s consider the way we have arranged our presidential debates.  Thanks to the way we have allowed the main stream news media to run the debates, don’t they look something like bear-baiting or a cock fight?

Bear Baiting in Saxon Times, Richard Caton Woodville, Jr., circa 1920.
Bear Baiting in Saxon Times, Richard Caton Woodville, Jr., circa 1920.

Instead of treating people who have offered to lead us with dignity and respect, we do our best to encourage them to lie and slander each other. Note that the RNC did its best to aggravate the situation (See Here’s Why The Audience Was So Raucous At Saturday’s Republican Debate (www.huffingtonpost.com) and RNC Under Fire Over Debate Audience Stacking–Local GOP Chairman Confirms Party Donors Get Debate Tickets (www.breitbart.com)).

Given the way we treat our candidates, we probably don’t deserve honorable, dignified, and highly competent leadership. Nonetheless, for the sake of our children, we need to find such leaders.

Therefore, we must ask. Which of the candidates seems most presidential?  Keep in mind we are electing a person. Chances are we won’t get anything approaching perfection, especially given our own imperfections.

Is Donald Trump presidential?

Here we have a man who has no problem saying what he thinks. His language is coarse. He does not lose graciously. He rips into his opponents with glee. He has openly admitted donating money to Democrats to buy influence. His public record strongly suggests he should be running for the Democratic Party’s nomination (See Donald Trump Is No Conservative (www.theatlantic.com) and Conservatives against Trump (www.nationalreview.com)).

Is Trump presidential? A good leader? Maybe. But presidential? Seriously?

Is Ted Cruz presidential?

What is the big slam against Ted Cruz? He is not popular with his colleagues in the Senate? Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Is Ted Cruz presidential? Could be.

Is Marco Rubio presidential?

The Ugly Truth About Marco Rubio And His Gang-of-Eight Amnesty Bill (townhall.com) and Marco, Marco, Marco (www.conservativereview.com) explain the issue with this candidate. Otherwise, he is presidential.

Because Governor Rick Perry was soft on immigration, Conservatives dropped him in a heartbeat.

Is Marco Rubio presidential?  Wrong question. What is Rubio still doing in the presidential race?

Is Ben Carson presidential?

Ben Carson is well spoken and very smart. His calm demeanor is exactly what we need.

Is Ben Carson presidential? Unfortunately, Carson does not have a record of serving in public office. So how well he might do is anyone’s guess. Nevertheless, we could do worse.

Is Jeb Bush presidential?

Jeb Bush’s father could not win a second term. He broke his promise.  “Read my lips. No new taxes.” Jeb Bush’s brother bailed out the big banks. That put Barack Obama in office, and that has been a disaster. Therefore, when Jeb Bush started running for office, he could not decide whether to distance himself from his family or embrace his heritage. And we are considering for him president? Weird!

As it is, Jeb Bush has continued to run only because he has the backing of lots of big donors.  What has he promised those people?

Is Jeb Bush presidential? Only if we want more of the same.

Is John Kasich presidential?

As governor of Ohio, John Kasich embraced Obamacare. He thinks Obamacare is biblical, not unconstitutional (John Kasich Rips ObamaCare Critics For Not Understanding the Bible (www.breitbart.com)).

Is John Kasich presidential? No.

Is Bernie Sanders presidential?

Before voting for this guy, read this, Bernie Sanders: 17 things the Democratic socialist believes (www.bbc.com). Keep in mind that we have a constitutional republic. Just as Barack Obama has already broken his oath as president, to do what he wants to do, Sanders would also have to violate his oath of office. In addition to violating his oath, Sanders would wreck what is left of our economy; he would reduce us to a third world has-been.

Is Bernie Sanders presidential? A socialist? How did we get to the point where we even have to ask?

Is Hillary Clinton presidential?

Is Hillary Clinton presidential? No. Hillary Clinton and her Bubba both belong in jail.

Advertisements

30 thoughts on “WHICH OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IS MOST PRESIDENTIAL?

    1. Thank you very much. I very much appreciate the thought, but I am concerned it might go to my head.

      My concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side, for God is always right.”

      ― Abraham Lincoln

      So was someone else, a far wiser soul than I.

      Liked by 2 people

  1. Being presidential is 90% faithfulness to the Constitution and 5% presidential demeanor (Think Ronald Reagan). All except the current White House occupant has been driven to varying degrees by Judeo-Christian tradition. Our presidential heroes were among the most devout.

    Liked by 1 person

        1. There is a widget for that.

          The first thing you have to do is select a Theme with a sidebar. I do that from WPADMIN. That brings up the DASHBOARD. If you put your cursor on the Appearance menu option, you will see over a half dozen choice. That include the options to select the Themes and Widgets you want. After you select a Theme. Choose the Widgets you want.

          You can put Widgets in either sidebars or footers. The Theme controls whether you have sidebars or footers.

          Hope that helps. If you want to get more sophisticated, you may wish to contact the folks at WordPress’ help desk. I have used it and found the their people helpful.

          Like

    1. mastersamwise

      I would argue that Obama has done nothing but been driven by a degree of Judeo-Christian values. Unless you contend that “faithfulness to the Constitution”–whatever that is supposed to mean–is a Judeo-Christian value. In which case, I would shake the dust from my metaphorical sandals.

      Like

      1. @mastersamwise

        That allusion to Matthew 10:5-15 is totally inappropriate.

        Keeping our oath is a Judeo-Christian value. Obama has OBVIOUSLY not kept his oath of office. Unfortunately, Obama is not alone in his oath-breaking. Therefore, we risk losing our constitutional republic, and the fact you don’t understand the value of a constitutional republic says more about flaws in your character than it does mine.

        Like

        1. mastersamwise

          “Keeping our oath is a Judeo-Christian value.” I agree.

          “Obama has OBVIOUSLY not kept his oath of office.” I would say that is subjective, unless he were indicted. For what do our opinions matter when all opinions, save those of the court, are equal when determining whether a man is forsworn? If he has broken no civil law, then we can do nothing. If he has broken God’s law, then God can arrest him.

          “the fact you don’t understand the value of a constitutional republic says more about flaws in your character than it does mine.” Do you recall the passage where John relates that the Lord will come and smash the nations or where he tells that he will come and lay waste to the nations with the sword from his mouth? I do and so I value this republic in the estimation of the one who formed it: fitting for a purpose but will soon pass away.

          In any case, I would say that Obama has done nothing that is not firmly within the–albeit pseudo–Judeo-Christian values of the Enlightenment. I know the term Marxist is thrown around a lot but I think that is an insult to Marxists. Perhaps he is socialist but that is no great surprise; everyone is a little bit socialist, from Trump with his Muslim registration to Cruz with his government imposed expatriation. My point there is not to claim one person is a socialist or not, but to point out that no politician follows strictly any set ideology, be it conservative, liberal, libertarian, socialist, Maoist, Trotskyist, socialist, distributist, or whatever-ist we can nearly approximate it. In the end, we find common threads to that most ill-planned movement that desired, as Nietzsche rightly critiqued, to eat the cake of Judeo-Christianity but wanted none of the meat and potatoes. They wanted that moral force, the force by which both red and blue today constantly vie for, to validate principle that are, by themselves, invalid.

          See, there is an inverse to Tolstoy’s critique of the “Great Man.” Though he hated Napoleon, he refused to say Napoleon or any man really was the cause of the ills of Russia. Just as Napoleon had no more to do with the invasion of Russia as Kutuzov had in the saving of Russia, neither does Obama have anything more to do with the degradation of America as (insert favored prince in which we should place our trust this time) does in saving it.

          Like

        2. @mastersamwise

          There really is no question about the fact Obama is a liar. It doesn’t take any serious effort to find examples of his lies.

          In a constitutional republic, every citizen has an obligation to be familiar with the Constitution and to hold public officials accountable. When you make the Supreme Court solely responsible, that is just plain cowardice. When our elected leaders pull such a stunt, all they have done is demonstrate they are unfit for the office they hold.

          Liked by 1 person

        3. mastersamwise

          Is it not written, “I said in my alarm, “All men are liars.” Every man lies, either to himself or others. If this is the litmus test, then we are all condemned. My point remains: Obama merely follows the pseudo-Judeo-Christian values of the Enlightenment and its modern scions. Were he truly to reject them, he may have gotten more of the stuff he wanted.

          And yet Tom, all of it will pass. And there is great hope in that.

          Like

      1. mastersamwise

        I did. I thought it was good. But isn’t it rather interesting that we consider a thing so subjective and so incumbent on human feeling to be a determining factor in who will be the chief executive?

        But I thought your’s was good because it closely aligns with what I have been saying about an objective moral order. Your critique of Trump was spot on. It is written: “A kind mouth multiplies friends and gracious lips prompt friendly greetings.” It is not enough to have the right experience like Bush or Kasich or even the right ideology like Cruz or Carson. Your example of Trump, I think, speaks to a much more important factor: are they a good man?

        I have said for a long time that we should not elect men like ourselves but men who are better than us. Indeed, this is what Aristotle speaks to in the Politics. The goodness of a polis is not in its constitution, but in the moral standing of its rulers.

        Like

        1. @mastersamwise

          I see you are very selective with respect to which of my critiques you enjoyed, but I suppose that is true of everyone.

          I have said for a long time that we should not elect men like ourselves but men who are better than us. Indeed, this is what Aristotle speaks to in the Politics. The goodness of a polis is not in its constitution, but in the moral standing of its rulers.

          Each of us already tries to elect people who are “better” than us, and look at what we get. We get people with the morals we ourselves espouse.

          Consider the irony. Most Americans detest Congress, but they think their own congressman is okay.

          The moral character of a people determines the moral character of their government. That’s why every attempt to use government to improve the moral character of a people eventually fails. Government is about power, and power corrupts. Therefore, when government is given the power mold the character of a people, first the government and then the people become corrupt.

          Like

        2. mastersamwise

          Trump is a danger to all Americans. When something of so great an evil as he appears, I find that I can actually judge someone’s character without much reproach. I feel I cannot judge the others; they have not revealed themselves as much as Trump.

          Perhaps, then, the morals we espouse should be better as well.

          “That’s why every attempt to use government to improve the moral character of a people eventually fails.” Theodosius’s ban on paganism seemed to have worked well, albeit terrible if you are a pagan.

          “Government is about power…” To some, maybe. Consider Tolkien and the forging of the One. It was made in malice and so turns all to malice. But with the Three, it was not so and with prudence they are able to sustain much good. For they were made for such a purpose and were kept by those who knew that purpose and above all the prudence to use them in need.

          Like

        3. @mastersamwise

          Been busy, but I suppose I had better respond to this.

          I am not an enthusiastic supporter of Donald Trump, but I would rather elect him than any of the Democrats.

          I fear that whoever we elect it will be the lesser of evils. As it is said in Romans: “No man is righteous. Not one.”

          Frankly, I am not interested in supporting tyranny, not even a supposedly Christian tyranny. Would not be Biblical.

          Like

        4. mastersamwise

          Christianity IS tyrannical. It is the most tyrannical slavery there is. And that is the beauty of it. Isn’t it odd that man is most himself, is the pinnacle of human nature, when he abandons his entire self to Divine Providence?

          Like

        5. mastersamwise

          So either Christ is wrong, Paul is wrong, or there is a deeper significance to the message. Our freedom does not depend on ink and vellum and we we must submit our unruly selves like slaves before their masters to that freedom.

          Like

        6. @mastersamwise

          I wonder why you want to be a Christian. You make the matter so complicated and unpleasant.

          As Christians, we become the children of God. We are family not slaves. Still, children must obey their Father.

          God gives us a choice. He tells us we must choose.

          Matthew 6:24 New King James Version (NKJV)

          24 “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.

          So yes, God is our Master, but He is the Master of OUR HOUSE. We are His adopted children.

          Jesus tells us serving Him is easy labor.

          Matthew 11:28-30 New King James Version (NKJV)

          28 Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”

          Seriously! What fool would choose to be a Christian if he did not want to be a Christian?

          For the most part, Paul speaks of us as being slaves to sin, not slaves to God.

          Nevertheless, if you insist upon being being obstinate, please explain this passage.

          1 Corinthians 7:20-24 New King James Version (NKJV)

          20 Let each one remain in the same calling in which he was called. 21 Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use it. 22 For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave. 23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. 24 Brethren, let each one remain with God in that state in which he was called.

          Like

  2. I agree with your comments. The Presidential quality I would prefer the candidates would provide capable of instilling to Americans is hope and leadership.

    https://rudymartinka.wordpress.com/2014/06/25/king-solomon-on-hope-and-leadership-ud/

    All both the Dems and GOP candidates portray to me is more of the same O, Same O.

    Also wish someone would clue in all the young followers of Bernie who are enamored with his free college tuition spiel about other countries, should explain the differences in their college experience compared to the US.

    Most students live at home with their parents and attend college once or twice a week to attend large gatherings and listen to a lecture. They listen and are given assignments to discover and complete on their own and submit the assignments en mass for grading.

    No college party dorms, no small classes to ask questions, etc etc.

    Regards and goodwill blogging.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. That is a great post you wrote.

      Reading it again makes me think of what we have heard about totalitarian states. The leaders make wonderful promises, but their focus has nothing to do with what they promise. Every move they make is designed to ensure their continuance in power. So the people they rule live in poverty in a police state, constantly in fear for their lives.

      Socialists such a Bernie Sanders almost obvious in their designs. What such demagogues proclaim is, “give me power, and I will give your dreams.” How stupid do we have to be to fall for such malarkey, but many of us do.

      Earlier generations of American politician were only just a little bit more subtle. For example, when they proposed to amend the Constitution so they could implement income taxes, they said they would only use that amendment to tax the rich. It sure didn’t work out that way.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Matthew

    I shall admit. Of all my years voting, I am very disappointed with the selection of candidates, though Mr. Carson is gaining ground with me. We shall see.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Matthew

      I forgot to mention. Though Mr. Carson possesses no public office experience — does one need public office experience? — he will surround himself with knowledgeable and experienced people, as every president will do. We tend to forget that the president has a cabinet and those cabinet members assist the president in making sound decisions, or so in theory. Ha!

      Like

      1. @Matthew

        Good question! From time-to-time we have elected men to the presidency without prior experience in political office. Off the top of my head I can think of two. Because both men had experience that demonstrated they were prepared to weld great power responsibly, they were reasonable choices.

        As a doctor Carson has management experience, and he has borne grave responsibilities, but nothing on the level of Grant or Eisenhower.

        Unfortunately, the men and women we have with such experience, our elites, don’t give us much cause to trust them anymore. Too many of them are sadly lacking in ethics. The rest. Either the Republican Establishment has thwarted their campaigns or the main stream news media has slimed those with the courage to retain their integrity. That is why virtually all the governors have dropped out or seen their campaigns stagnate.

        Like

    1. Thanks for the comment.

      We have much the same problems. People always want something for nothing. Once we start voting for politicians who promise us what belongs to someone else, our problems only get worse.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. What we are seeing with THE Donald is a man who will say anything, do anything to get elected.

    That makes him just like every other garden variety crook (aka politician) who ever made a career out of spending other people’s money.

    Presidential, in the American sense, means statesman.

    George Washington was a statesman.

    Abraham Lincoln was a statesman.

    Ted Cruz is a statesman.

    A statesman is an American president who understands the absolute, critical importance of the “laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” to the very existence of the American Republic.

    If our elected officials do not understand the “laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” then liberty is not possible…

    …and humanity goes back to the good old days of bone grinding poverty, starvation, plague and justice always being the advantage of the strong.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. @silenceofmind

      Bull’s-eye! The Donald is definitely not my choice. Don’t think most of the party want’s him. The problem is the way we award delegates. If he can win with a largest plurality of votes, he will get most of them, and he will be a problem.

      What makes matters worst is that he has such high negatives. If he manages to wind the Republican nomination, even Bernie Sanders might beat him.

      Definitely a time for prayer.

      Like

Comments are closed.