Bob Iger Running for President?

[RevFreako]

I understand exactly what the law states and what I am saying is in my opinion I think the law should be changed. Like I said I have no problem at all if any celeb. or whoever wants to run for political office they can do so, but they need to go through some sort of channel system before putting their hat in the Presidential Race(The Highest Office in the United States) or even the Vice Presidency for that matter. Before my time Ronald Reagan did just that and that is perfectly fine. That is all I am saying. I think when a person has the responsibility of the Highest Office in all of the United States they should have some experience under there belt before taking over that job. Take myself for example in a much smaller scale, I am about to graduate with a degree in Elementary Education. Do you think a school would hire me as a Principal right out of college with no teaching experience at all? No Way. All I am saying is the law need to be adjusted.

You're right in that you don't have the tools to be President, and neither do I, and neither does Trump, but we have the right to throw our hat into the ring, and of all the laws that need to be changed in this country, that is not one of them.

To take your example, no, you do not have the tools to be a principal, yet, but you have the right to submit your application for the job, and no law should take it away. It's up to, I imagine in your example the Superintendant of schools, to laugh at your application and bin it with a quickness, and in the example of the Presidency it's up to the populace to laugh at a Trump and not vote for him, but it's your right, and Trump's, to apply for the job, and any law that would stop either of you would be unethical on its face..

 

[Pixie Jules]

You're right in that you don't have the tools to be President, and neither do I, and neither does Trump, but we have the right to throw our hat into the ring, and of all the laws that need to be changed in this country, that is not one of them.

Can you give me a reason why it should not be adjusted or is it because it is has been that way for so long? Well, there are laws trying to be changed right now concerning this country that have been a mainstay here for quite a long time but they are attempting to get them passed.

 

[RevFreako]

Can you give me a reason why it should not be adjusted or is it because it is has been that way for so long? Well, there are laws trying to be changed right now concerning this country that have been a mainstay here for quite a long time but they are attempting to get them passed.

Yes: the ideal that anybody can become President is one of the founding ideas of our version of democracy. It stands right alongside the idea that all men are created equal. Both are true in spirit even if not in practice.

 

[Pixie Jules]

Yes: the ideal that anybody can become President is one of the founding ideas of our version of democracy. It stands right alongside the idea that all men are created equal. Both are true in spirit even if not in practice.

So what you are technically saying then is we as American People have the right for this but when it comes to other rights that the people recently had and this administration is attempting to take away that is perfectly fine?

 

[RevFreako]

So what you are technically saying then is we as American People have the right for this but when it comes to other rights that the people recently had and this administration is attempting to take away that is perfectly fine?

No, I stand in strong opposition to everything the Trump administration is trying to implement, but that doesn't change the fact that we are a representative democracy and not a meritocracy, which is what the law you propose would make us, and despite the fact that 45 and co. are doing their level best to turn us into either an oligarchy or a Dominionist theocracy, depending on which way the wind is blowing today.

 

[RevFreako]

There are lots of things about this country that need to change, but that isn't one of them.

 

[Pixie Jules]

No, I stand in strong opposition to everything the Trump administration is trying to implement, but that doesn't change the fact that we are a representative democracy and not a meritocracy, which is what the law you propose would make us, and despite the fact that 45 and co. are doing their level best to turn us into either an oligarchy or a Dominionist theocracy, depending on which way the wind is blowing today.

At least I fully understand where you are coming from now. Your point is valid. Maybe it really needs to come down to the American people themselves when it comes time to vote to see through these people that decide to run for President with no experience at all. I recently heard the President Trump's approval rate was the lowest of any new President in recent times. The problem with that is it is a little too late now for people to start seeing the the real truth. You may be correct that it needs to come down to the American people to become more educated with there voting knowledge. I am very young and new to all this, but I submerged myself into it pretty heavily this last campaign because it is going to affect my future. More people really need to start doing that I think.

 

[RevFreako]

At least I fully understand where you are coming from now. Your point is valid. Maybe it really needs to come down to the American people themselves when it comes time to vote to see through these people that decide to run for President with no experience at all. I recently heard the President Trump's approval rate was the lowest of any new President in recent times. The problem with that is it is a little too late now for people to start seeing the the real truth. You may be correct that it needs to come down to the American people to become more educated with there voting knowledge. I am very young and new to all this, but I submerged myself into it pretty heavily this last campaign because it is going to affect my future. More people really need to start doing that I think.

We agree completely. The system didn't fail us with Trump; the system did its job the way it always does. The people failed us, and failed themselves.

 

[Pixie Jules]

We agree completely. The system didn't fail us with Trump; the system did its job the way it always does. The people failed us, and failed themselves.

The thing is I believe a lot of those people are seeing they were fooled, but unfortunately it is too late now. Hopefully people will learn from this.

 

[RevFreako]

The thing is I believe a lot of those people are seeing they were fooled, but unfortunately it is too late now. Hopefully people will learn from this.

You got it in one. I'm fifty/fifty on whether the American people have learned a single thing from all this, but I'm foolish enough to hope for the best.

 

[Pixie Jules]

You got it in one. I'm fifty/fifty on whether the American people have learned a single thing from all this, but I'm foolish enough to hope for the best.

I can only hope.

 

[P@n!K_Sw1tC#]

The thing is I believe a lot of those people are seeing they were fooled, but unfortunately it is too late now. Hopefully people will learn from this.

You got it in one. I'm fifty/fifty on whether the American people have learned a single thing from all this, but I'm foolish enough to hope for the best.

As someone who voted for Trump in both the primaries and the general, I don't feel this way at all. He's doing exactly what he said he's going to do during the campaign. You don't have to agree with it - but it's not some sort of big surprise. And just like your last two pages indicate - the people want politicians that say what they mean and mean what they say.

 

[Pixie Jules]

As someone who voted for Trump in both the primaries and the general, I don't feel this way at all. He's doing exactly what he said he's going to do during the campaign. You don't have to agree with it - but it's not some sort of big surprise. And just like your last two pages indicate - the people want politicians that say what they mean and mean what they say.

This is absolutely true, he is doing most of what he said he would do. The writing however is also on the wall as his approval rating is the lowest of any President in modern day history. That is saying that way more than 50% of the population here disapprove of what he was doing. Now according to him since he said he won the popular vote something drastic has changed in that percentage over just about a 2 month period. He also has backed off his original stance about the Wall. Saying that Mexico was paying for it and you can "Believe That." Well unless we all became Mexicans our tax dollars are paying for it. Also with the wall he stated that it will be built as high as need be. Then he went on to say that part of the wall will be a fence which it already is. Now with the Travel Ban another of his agendas he has backed off of somewhat. His original plan failed and just 1 day after Tweeting, " See you in court" he and his administration had another plan. This plan sounded similar to what Hilary Clinton wanted to do with the illegals who have committed crimes in this country. Which I don't have a problem with at all. My problem with this entire thing is how he and his administration and others are attempting to make this whole thing about Religion which it is not. Banning Muslims and certain Muslim Nations that don't have ties with your businesses is not the answer. There are many terrorists in America today that are American Citizens and will do anything to hurt this country. Sure there are others from other countries that do not like America and there always will be. When we as Americans turn away from our Constitution which is what I believe Revfreako was referring to in his posts and turn to hate which I believe is what is going on right now it will only make matters worse and here is why. Like I said there are many people who are Legal American Citizens in this country that do not like this country for whatever reason, this ban of others just fuels their hatred even more toward the country and something could easily get started. So banning people because they are of Muslim belief is just down right wrong and unconstitutional. This also goes for other countries who seek to come here and get away from the mess they live in. I honestly hope things improve and if things come out in this Russia thing it could be the downfall of Donald Trump.

 

[P@n!K_Sw1tC#]

The Dems have a way lower approval rating than Trump right now, but I'd put my money on the fact that you probably didn't know that. People are tired of same old politicians peddling their same old bull. That's why nobody approves. Interestingly enough, for as polarizing as Trump is, he's got one of the highest approval ratings in DC right now, while having the lowest in modern presidential history. Now what exactly does that say?

To me, it shows a huge opportunity for successful private sector leaders such as Iger and Oprah to consider running for the presidency. The boys and ladies on the hill cant seem to move the needle - so the American people are looking elsewhere.

BTW, I'd also recommend you do a little bit of independent research on the issues. If you'd like I'd be happy to point you to some resources that do their best to eliminate bias and stick to the facts. You seem to have a lot of interest in this (and that's exciting), I just think you'd be better off with more detail and less pluralities.

 

[Pixie Jules]

The Dems have a way lower approval rating than Trump right now, but I'd put my money on the fact that you probably didn't know that. People are tired of same old politicians peddling their same old bull. That's why nobody approves. Interestingly enough, for as polarizing as Trump is, he's got one of the highest approval ratings in DC right now, while having the lowest in modern presidential history. Now what exactly does that say?

To me, it shows a huge opportunity for successful private sector leaders such as Iger and Oprah to consider running for the presidency. The boys and ladies on the hill cant seem to move the needle - so the American people are looking elsewhere.

BTW, I'd also recommend you do a little bit of independent research on the issues. If you'd like I'd be happy to point you to some resources that do their best to eliminate bias and stick to the facts. You seem to have a lot of interest in this (and that's exciting), I just think you'd be better off with more detail and less pluralities.

Well at the rate things have been going these first 2 months we shall see what happens come 2018 when many of these Senators and House Reps are up for re-election. Many of which are starting to re-think there stance to stand by Donald Trump because they want to have a job come re-election time. As for the Presidency though you can turn it anyway you want it has been documented as he has the lowest approval rate of any President in modern history at the start of his Presidency. For someone who said he won the popular vote which to me says he had more than 50% of the country on his side something is slipping.

The problem is the majority of the American people and I am not saying all the American people see a popular name like Donald Trump or Iger or Oprah and they are intrigued. Most of them don't even do research on what they stand for or anything. They just go out and cast a ballot on a name. That is where the whole process falls apart in my opinion. Way too many American people don't pay a damn bit of attention to what these people are saying and vote because of the name and then when they get into office they start griping about it. Well it's there own damn fault.

As for researching the issues I primarily stick to the candidates pages themselves. The media or any of those other left side or right side sites report what they want to report and pretty much rehash the same issues over and over and over again. I try and stay away from all of that. So basically I get what I get either from what is written on the candidates own page or out of the candidates own mouth and that is it.

 

[JoeCamel]

Ummmmm - Bob Iger for prez?

:topic:

 

[Pixie Jules]

Ummmmm - Bob Iger for prez?

:topic:

Well, Bob Iger like any of the other popular name people who decide to run for President with no political experience all the American people really need to do is either listen really good to what these people are saying or go to the candidates webpage and read up on what they are saying and want to do and not just vote on a name with out really listening much at all. Most people, but not all people are not well read or informed of the candidates issues and stances and they just vote with the party they are signed up as because they always have or if they have a big name. The American people can and will get burned that way.

 

[RevFreako]

As someone who voted for Trump in both the primaries and the general, I don't feel this way at all. He's doing exactly what he said he's going to do during the campaign. You don't have to agree with it - but it's not some sort of big surprise. And just like your last two pages indicate - the people want politicians that say what they mean and mean what they say.

I mean no disrespect, and won't debate further here, but yours is a minority position even among Republicans..

 

[Andysol]

We agree completely. The system didn't fail us with Trump; the system did its job the way it always does. The people failed us, and failed themselves.

failed you and others. Not us- well, certainly not me.

As someone who voted for Trump in both the primaries and the general, I don't feel this way at all. He's doing exactly what he said he's going to do during the campaign. You don't have to agree with it - but it's not some sort of big surprise. And just like your last two pages indicate - the people want politicians that say what they mean and mean what they say.

:agree:

Banning Muslims and certain Muslim Nations that don't have ties with your businesses is not the answer. So banning people because they are of Muslim belief is just down right wrong and unconstitutional.

Sigh....
Trump has business ties with the following Muslim majority nations:
-Saudi Arabia (should have a ban also IMO)
-United Arab Emirates
-Turkey
and potentially Egypt- though we are unsure.

Here are a list of Muslim majority nations not on the original ban (Iraq is now off):
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Brunei
Burkina Faso
Chad
Comoros
Djibouti
Egypt
Guinea
Indonesia
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kosovo
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Lebanon
Libya
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Mauritania
Mayotte
Morocco
Niger
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Palestine
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Tajikistan
The Gambia
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus
Turkmenistan
United Arab Emirates
Uzbekistan
Western Sahara

If I could offer you any advice- is don't trust the media at face value for anything. And that's either side. They are masters of manipulation and half truths. Saying a "muslim ban" will incite anger, defense, and general emotion then simply saying 7 of the 52 muslim majority nations. Why say this? It's all about emotions. Emotions deliver short "highs" and then you come back for more outrage/emotion. Once that news cycle is over- then onto the next outrage. They use our emotions to fuel us and get ratings. So if saying "banning muslims" is what entices emotion. That's what they'll say. Who cares if it picks and chooses the words as long as they get ratings. Look at O'Reilly for the other side- it's just as ridiculous. They use our endorphins against us.

Moderates and Centrists would be the biggest winners along with libertarians with Iger being President.

Can you explain this more @quinnmac000 ? I've always considered myself closest politically to a Libertarian and typically vote as such for my local elections. Are you saying he could potentially trim government while being more socially liberal?

 

[RevFreako]

failed you and others. Not us- well, certainly not me.[/QUOTEThe fact that this is okay is a pretty firm indictment of what's wrong with this country. A whole lot of Effort you, I got mine...