What do you look for in an elected candidate?

I'm starting this project hoping that over this and some other threads people can see what they care about in a candidate, where they stand on issues, what they like to see from leaders, and ultimately who they wish to vote for outside of the spin. I would prefer for people to state their opinions but I know some will argue. I ask that people try and keep that to a minimum and simply accept that different people have different values and beliefs.

In Governors and Presidents I look for the same thing. I want someone who can lead. I don't particularly care if I agree with their plan or not. If an executive is a good leader they can create an agenda and make a case for congress to follow it. If they aren't a worthy leader they will fail and be impotent for 4-8 years.

The man who has made 100 promises but made no specifics as to how it would be done, has said nothing. This is why I preferred Obama beating McCain. Obama laid out a plan for healthcare and how it would act. What we got isn't exactly what he promised but that's always true in politics. His opponent never offered a real plan or direction for the country. His best line was "we'll continue the Bush wars". We could go back further too with Kerry, a man who at one time was a senate leader. His entire campaign was full of flip flops with no direction and no concrete plans to fix the country. Bush for better or worse, had a plan and had a way to execute it.

In house representatives I look for people who will listen to their base. I don't want them to represent the peoples vote 100% of the time because that's nothing more than mob rule, and I don't want them to listen to the feedback from everyone equally. Without a background on law, finance, or trade you have less voice about the TPP. 100% of the population will never be in agreement, which means a rep must always act while realizing that by doing so they are pissing people off. I want them to be ruthlessly pragmatic, and vote based on if their district or state gains because of a deal or law being voted on. If there's a benefit they should support it, regardless of the feelings of constituents. Basically, benevolent dicators.

The senate is in a weird spot, they basically just act as "those other guys" these days. I vote here based on who I like, because being a senator is a powerful posistion but their campaigns are about the peoples needs while their jobs are about the states needs.

How about the rest of you?

My candidates should be...

Pro 2nd Amendment
Pro Constitution
Support limited government
Support state rights
Support freedom
Be patriotic
Anti-war

a reply to: Aazadan

Corruption,cause that is all your going to find.
second line

a reply to: Aazadan

Do you agree that no international agreement can become law until we the people have agreed to it through a referendum

Do you agree that no international convention can be signed until we the people have agreed to it through a referendum

Do you agree that no troops can be sent outside the national boarders until we the people have agreed to it through a referendum

Do you agree that the if the banks can have the power to create money out of thin air then the government should also have this power so that none of us should have to pay tax and the government can create all the money needed provide all the goods and services needed in the economy just be a treasury official signing a financial instrument bringing the money into existence

Dirt under their fingernails and callouses on their hands through hard graft, not from spending cold nights in the bushes on their hands and knees in Hyde Park.

a reply to: Soloprotocol
I think some real world experience is certainly an advantage (will make exception for Mhairi Black just cause I love her)
Too many top level politicians are just career politicians with no experience or abilities in the real world. You end up with health secretary's who don't understand basic science and chancellors with no economic or finance experience.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Soloprotocol
I think some real world experience is certainly an advantage (will make exception for Mhairi Black just cause I love her)
Too many top level politicians are just career politicians with no experience or abilities in the real world. You end up with health secretary's who don't understand basic science and chancellors with no economic or finance experience.

I think Mhairi might just not be that into guys, so any hopes you have of any sort of romantic relationship could be over before it's begun...just a hunch....either that or Mhairi is the leader of the Cal Toi or the Tongs ya bass..I certainly wouldn't mess with her.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Soloprotocol
I think some real world experience is certainly an advantage (will make exception for Mhairi Black just cause I love her)
Too many top level politicians are just career politicians with no experience or abilities in the real world. You end up with health secretary's who don't understand basic science and chancellors with no economic or finance experience.

I think Mhairi might just not be that into guys, so any hopes you have of any sort of romantic relationship could be over before it's begun...just a hunch....either that or Mhairi is the leader of the Cal Toi or the Tongs ya bass..I certainly wouldn't mess with her.

You have just made her sound even more alluring...

I want someone who is going to be so little involved in my day to day life that who he or she is and what he or she does matters about as much as what all of you had for dinner.

a reply to: Aazadan

By the time they are elected its to late.

1) Honesty. As long as he/she is honest, and up front, I can deal with most anything else.

2) Accountable. 'course that goes along with the honesty bit.

3) Able to think, and listen.

4) ...nope, that's all I got.

The best way to see through any politician is unfortunately not very useful for elections.

1. First, you take note of everything the candidate says and promises in his/her campaigns.

2. Then, if they win, you watch what they actually do and compare their actions with their words.

Usually, you find it's like two completely different people. But what can you do once the damage is done? Nothing. They know it so they know they can lie with impunity until they actually get elected and people see what they're really all about. By that time, even if it costs them reelection, they have moved their agenda (or the agenda of those they serve) from one place to another. They accomplished what they set out to do. The next candidate will do the same.

The only thing you can really do is assume that if the promise something that sounds way too good, they will probably do exactly the opposite if elected. UNLESS what they promise is actually tyrannical. You see, sometimes when the majority is pissed off, tyranny sounds good. If a candidate promises tyranny when the majority wants it, look out because they'll probably deliver in spades.

Anyway, there's a popular saying that evidently goes way back. And that is that talk is cheap. People who make extravagant promises usually have no intentions of keeping them. And worse, they usually have a hidden agenda and you'll never know it until the voters give them the pen to sign away your life.

They have to be sensible and commit to compromise and voting/acting across party lines. Anytime a candidate says that they'll vote 100% for republican or democrat platform, I know I will not be voting for them.

I also look for someone that is anti big bank, for smaller military budget, anti NSA, for reigning in our police departments, for LGBT rights and who is not an evangelical Christian.

must support Israel first

originally posted by: Danbones
must support Israel first

Ha...I respect your opinion, but i would say they need to support Palestinian Statehood first and Israel second.