Arafat Calls for Democratic Elections in the United States

[Boris Godunov]

I try to. That's what I was doing here. RJ said a person from a poor background couldn't get elected President, and I was providing a case where it actually happened. There have been others (albeit many, many years ago).

I have no clue what his party affiliation is.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov




I don't think you know enough about my positions on issues to think I'm some sort of slave to a party line. I don't care for either of the major parties much, but I find the Republicans to be the far more repugnant and hypocritical of the two.

I think Democrats are more hypocritical

they are both equally bad in my mind

Jon Miller

[Ned]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I try to. That's what I was doing here. RJ said a person from a poor background couldn't get elected President, and I was providing a case where it actually happened. There have been others (albeit many, many years ago).

I have no clue what his party affiliation is.

I agree with you on getting elected president. Lincoln came from a poor background and he was a republican to boot.

In my view, looking back, there have been good presidents and not so good presidents. Some of each have come from both parties. For example, I think FDR, Kennedy and Reagan were all outstanding presidents.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
How about Bill Clinton? Born poor and from Arkansas. Yet on his talents and intelligence he was able to become the President of the United States.

Sure, he's more of an exception than a rule, but he shows it is possible. Just don't expect it to be a Republican who does it.

What about Richard Nixon? He lived in a shack while he attended Duke Law School because while he had a scholarship to pay for tuition, he had no money from his family for living expenses.

Gerald Ford's father was a paint salesman, which is hardly the sort of career a blue-blood dabbles in.

Eisenhower's family wasn't wealthy either. The only really wealthy Republican presidents since the second world war are in fact the Bush's pere and fils.

The Democrats in the period since the second world war have the middle class Harry Truman, the lower class Bill Clinton, along with the quite wealthy JFK and LBJ.

The claim that none but the rich have a chance to become president is completely bogus, and as bogus when applied to the Republicans as the Democrats. Class mobility is not only merely possible in the U.S., it is still common. Both of my parents were poor, growing up on farms far from cities or money. Both were the first in their families to attend college, and both were able to establish themselves comfortably in upper middle class careers, my father as a professor and my mother as a physician.

Of course wealth is an advantage. Obviously a disproportionate number of our presidents have come from some wealth, but it's not fair to make the claim that one's class disqualifies one from high office, and the proof lies in the fact that less than half of the presidents of the last 50+ years have come from the upper class.

[Roland]

"The claim that none but the rich have a chance to become president is completely bogus"

Ok, but it has become harder for the underdogs. Both party establishments are decadent inbreeding *****es, and came up with Daddy boy Bore and Daddy boy Shrub.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Roland
"The claim that none but the rich have a chance to become president is completely bogus"

Ok, but it has become harder for the underdogs. Both party establishments are decadent inbreeding *****es, and came up with Daddy boy Bore and Daddy boy Shrub.

Perhaps so, though I can't really fully support that position based on the evidence at hand. Our last two presidents have come from the upper and lower classes, and as I pointed out above there is a fairly even distribution according to class over the last decades of the 20th century.

I agree that these political dynasties are a real problem. It's very easy to make your way into political power when your father knows so many important political players on a first name basis. And look at the quality of the two candidates you mention.

[Victor Galis]

Kennedy didn't do anything

I agree with you on getting elected president. Lincoln came from a poor background and he was a republican to boot.

-Yeah, but Republicans back then were more different from today's Republicans than today's Democrats are.

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by Sikander
Of course wealth is an advantage. Obviously a disproportionate number of our presidents have come from some wealth, but it's not fair to make the claim that one's class disqualifies one from high office, and the proof lies in the fact that less than half of the presidents of the last 50+ years have come from the upper class.

OK, so what is the proportion of 'working class' people in the US, and what is the proportion of US Presidents that have come from 'working class' backgrounds?

Maybe then you will see the point.

Anyway, even if a candidate does come from a working class background, they cannot realistically stand for President unless they have earned millions of dollars on the way. In fact they have to be obscenely wealthy. Now, I understand that Americans have a different view of 'good' and 'bad' from Europeans, but I don't think you are picking your Presidents from the most principled segment of society.

There are of course always exceptions, such as Carter, but your system almost guarantees that you elect an unprincipled sh*t-head.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh

OK, so what is the proportion of 'working class' people in the US, and what is the proportion of US Presidents that have come from 'working class' backgrounds?

Maybe then you will see the point.

If "the point" is that wealthy people serve in positions of power disproportionally, then I have not only already seen it, I have made it in the portion of my post which you quote. Can you read at a level that allows you to attend University?

Originally posted by Rogan Josh

Anyway, even if a candidate does come from a working class background, they cannot realistically stand for President unless they have earned millions of dollars on the way. In fact they have to be obscenely wealthy. Now, I understand that Americans have a different view of 'good' and 'bad' from Europeans, but I don't think you are picking your Presidents from the most principled segment of society.

There are of course always exceptions, such as Carter, but your system almost guarantees that you elect an unprincipled sh*t-head.

Amusingly, the only president in the last 60 years or so who came from a lower or middle class background and who had attained the status of millionaire before he became president is Jimmy Carter. Of course none of them managed to become "obscenely wealthy", though perhaps you define that as anyone wealthier than yourself. Honestly, if you are going to opine about something that you don't know the first thing about, try to state opinions about things which are a matter of opinion rather than factual matters which can be refuted in a 30 second search on the internet.

[Boris Godunov]

Isn't going from lower, working class to millionaire to President the epitome of the American Dream?

[Roland]

Does that mean the Shrub is the american nightmare ?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Roland
Does that mean the Shrub is the american nightmare ?

Bingo.

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by Sikander
Amusingly, the only president in the last 60 years or so who came from a lower or middle class background and who had attained the status of millionaire before he became president is Jimmy Carter. Of course none of them managed to become "obscenely wealthy", though perhaps you define that as anyone wealthier than yourself. Honestly, if you are going to opine about something that you don't know the first thing about, try to state opinions about things which are a matter of opinion rather than factual matters which can be refuted in a 30 second search on the internet.

Why bother with 30 second searches on the internet when you provide perfectly adequate supplies of self-contradiction in your own posts? For example, you have already stated that Clinton came from a 'poor' background, but he was most definitely a millionaire before he became President.

You can't have it both ways. Every recent US President has been a (multi) millionaire before becoming President. Either they have been born poor and risen to these riches (rather rare) or have been born into priviliged families (more common). You seem to be suggesting that they gain their wealth in some other way?

Any way you look at it, you have to be bloody rich to be allowed to be US President. Does this seem right to you?

[Boris Godunov]

Who was the last European President/Prime Minister to be poor/working class upon ascending to power?

[Roland]

Most come from the middle class. Schröder is from a piss poor family. Berlusconi is a self-made millionaire... well, make that a mafia made millionaire...