Would Tim Russert Make a Better President Than the Current Candidates?

  • News
  • Thread starter wasteofo2
  • Start date
In summary: Bush.Then it occurred to me; I trust Tim Russert more than any goddamned politician out there, and he should be running this goddamned Country. Tim Russert should be President.In summary, Tim Russert is an intelligent and articulate journalist who has covered Washington D.C. for a long time. He should be running for President instead of the current politicians.

Under what circumstances would you vote Russert for President?

  • There's only ONE Republican I would choose over Russert

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • There's only ONE Democrat I would choose over Russert

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I would choose an ordinary Democrat over Russert

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    10
  • #1
wasteofo2
478
2
I was just talking to a friend about '08, and he claimed that unless the Democrats did something stupid like nominate Feingold or Hillary, they'd easily win in '08. I said that Hillary might be able to win if there were someone like Newt Gingrich as the candidate, and he disputed this. I pointed out that Tim Russert said that in his opinion Hillary could win Florida, and that I trusted Tim Russert.

Then it occurred to me; I trust Tim Russert more than any goddamned politician out there, and he should be running this goddamned Country. Tim Russert should be President.

So, if Tim Russert ran for President, would you vote for him? Who would it take to beat Russert, or on the other hand, how bad would the candidates have to be for you to choose Russert?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Shouldn't the topic be? Tim Russert for President! come on man, you should be ecstatic.
 
  • #3
Well he's not going to actually run or anything, even though he must know that he could do it better than anyone else, he's just not that kinda guy...
 
  • #4
I don't know him that well but if he would run, why would Tim make a great president?
 
  • #5
In case I missed something obvious, I just need to point out that Tim Russert is a journalist, not a politician.
 
  • #6
If Tim Russert even gets nominated - I am moving to Canada.
 
  • #7
russ_watters said:
In case I missed something obvious, I just need to point out that Tim Russert is a journalist, not a politician.

I know Tim is a journalist. But was curious to know why Jacob thinks he'd make a great president.
 
  • #8
That was a general response to the thread, TP, not to you specifically.
 
  • #9
Could some patient American explain to an ignorant Norwegian who Tim Russert is?
 
  • #10
For the Norwegian, here's a little thing on who Tim Russert is: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4459759/

I'll explain my reasoning to the Americans who don't see why I'd want him as President in the afternoon...
 
  • #11
WOO2, I think we should review the qualifications expected of a person who wishes to run for President?
t58054o0fv8.jpg


Or even Governer.
http://www.canoe.ca/WrestlingImagesVentura/ventura_boa.jpg
 
  • #12
Well don't get surprised - there were number of Ku Klax Klan members elected into Senate, hence your qualifications arent really a concern so long people vote

As far as Russert is concerned - his 'show' is just that - a show. He has a staff of employees who do their homework and prepare for each new guest for an entire week. Heck, if I had a week to prepare on someone, I'd bury them alive and they'd run off crying from my show.

You can read up more on him here: http://slate.msn.com/id/2085153/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #13
Only the crooks fear Russert. That's why Cheney wouldn't appear on the show.
 
  • #14
Yes, yes! It's time someone like Russert ran for President! Enough of these retired actors (Shwarzenegger, Eastwood, Reagan), retired singers (Bono), and retired wrestlers (Ventura)!

We need a real change!
 
  • #15
cronxeh said:
As far as Russert is concerned - his 'show' is just that - a show. He has a staff of employees who do their homework and prepare for each new guest for an entire week. Heck, if I had a week to prepare on someone, I'd bury them alive and they'd run off crying from my show.

You can read up more on him here: http://slate.msn.com/id/2085153/
And you don't think normal politicians have staffs that do their homework for them, preapre their speeches for them, find their facts and figures for them, conduct research to determine what the best stance to take on an issue would be, do focus groups to determine what response to what question would be most agreeable to most people? All politicians are reliant upon their staffs, and while Russert definitely has a staff that helps him out with his ****, he's clearly a really smart guy who really understands what's going on. You can tell the difference between someone who's just been prepped by their staff (say John Edwards in the Democratic debates), and guys who really are smart and have a genuine in-depth knowledge of what they're talking about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16
  • #17
cronxeh said:
If Tim Russert even gets nominated - I am moving to Canada.
How long exactly have you been living in America? What exactly makes Russert such a repulsive candidate? He's an extremely intelligent and articulate journalist who covers Washington D.C., what's so repelling about that? I mean, look at the resumes of our last several Presidents before they became President.

Bush was a coke-head and an alcoholic whose wife nearly left him because he drank so much. He was ran several businesses into the ground and is in general a total moron.

Clinton wasn't an extrordinary Governor (who the hell wants to go to Arkansas?) by any means, and the only reasons he got elected were because Bush had screwed up SO horribly, combined with 12 years of Republican presidents (people tend to like a switch now and then), and the fact that he had some charisma. And hell, how many times did he cheat on his wife BEFORE he became President?

Bush Sr. played a huge role in Iran Contra, and before becoming Reagan's vice President, blasted Reagan's policies as moronic, then came to profess to believe in them.

Reagan was a goddamned c-list actor and already a senile old fool.

I mean, I could go on forever, why is being a highly respected, extremely intelligent journalist who knows tons about Washington and how it works, has a habbit of relentlessly cutting through politicians bull**** and really adressing whatever issue is at hand, worse than anything else our previous presidents have been?
 
  • #18
russ_watters said:
In case I missed something obvious, I just need to point out that Tim Russert is a journalist, not a politician.
Yeah he's a journalist, but look at all the people who jumped from not being politicians right into prominant political positions.

Arnold Schwarzaneggar was an actor who had a movie come out in his campaign for Governorship.

Jesse Ventura was like in the army, then a wrestler, then Governor.

Bill Bradley was a basketball player, then a Senator from New Jersey (was there an intermediate step?)

Hillary Clinton was only a member of the Shadow Government (not an elected official) when her husband was President, then became a Senator from NY when she had hardly lived there for a few months.

Ronald Reagan acted his way right to the Presidency.

That's one of the things about our system of Government, anyone who wants can run for office, and if you have the support of the people, you win. Russert obviously has a HUGE knowledge of the mechanics of Washington, is obviously very involved in that world, and a generally smart guy, so why not? I don't know if he has any military experience, but neither did Bill Clinton, and neither did George Bush.
 
  • #19
russ_watters said:
In case I missed something obvious, I just need to point out that Tim Russert is a journalist, not a politician.

AND THATS THE PROBLEM WITH OUR GOVERMENT
way too many politicians most of them working in the law
we need more real productive people who understand real life is not laws

 
  • #20
wasteofo2 said:
Yeah he's a journalist, but look at all the people who jumped from not being politicians right into prominant political positions.

Arnold Schwarzaneggar was an actor who had a movie come out in his campaign for Governorship.

Jesse Ventura was like in the army, then a wrestler, then Governor.

Bill Bradley was a basketball player, then a Senator from New Jersey (was there an intermediate step?)

Hillary Clinton was only a member of the Shadow Government (not an elected official) when her husband was President, then became a Senator from NY when she had hardly lived there for a few months.

Ronald Reagan acted his way right to the Presidency.

That's one of the things about our system of Government, anyone who wants can run for office, and if you have the support of the people, you win. Russert obviously has a HUGE knowledge of the mechanics of Washington, is obviously very involved in that world, and a generally smart guy, so why not? I don't know if he has any military experience, but neither did Bill Clinton, and neither did George Bush.
In spite of my initial incredulity, there's no reason he couldn't run for political office and he wouldn't be a repulsive candidate, at all. (Of course, I guess that really depends on what his political views are, though).

And ray b is right. I think the US has a higher percentage of elected offices filled by lawyers than any other country (or are at least close to the top of the list). There's no particular reason a lawyer makes a better Congressman or President than any other occupation - you only need the lawyer to help finalize the wording of the laws.

BTW, Bill Bradley was a very smart person who happened to be a good basketball player. Jack Kemp did that, as well, except he was a quarterback in the NFL. Neither Bradley, nor Kemp, were exactly superstars - fans of the sport would know who they were, but it's just a footnote to everyone else. Pat Hayden, quarterback of the Rams, is another who was certainly smart enough to find success in a more serious field (he was a Rhodes scholar), but chose the money and glamor of sports (I don't know what happened to him after football).

There's nothing inherently wrong with idea of cashing in on your past fame to go into politics, it's just that, hopefully, you bring something else along, as well.
 
  • #21
BobG said:
BTW, Bill Bradley was a very smart person who happened to be a good basketball player. Jack Kemp did that, as well, except he was a quarterback in the NFL. Neither Bradley, nor Kemp, were exactly superstars - fans of the sport would know who they were, but it's just a footnote to everyone else. Pat Hayden, quarterback of the Rams, is another who was certainly smart enough to find success in a more serious field (he was a Rhodes scholar), but chose the money and glamor of sports (I don't know what happened to him after football).
My point in Bill Bradley wasn't so much "Look at the dumb unqualified losers who jumped into politics after having a totally different career", using him as an example was more to show how someone doing something completely unrelated to politics could become a good representative of the people. Isn't that what it's supposed to be about anyway, representing the people?
 
  • #22
My country's vice-president was a well known former journalist. I just don't know how effective or how great of a leader he is since I haven't been there in 10 years. Heck, the former president was a former action star, mayor and alcoholic who used his popularity with the poor masses (typical in a third world country) to become president and became a corrupt leader. He's in jail now.

Russert running for president why not. I just don't think people know much about him and he's not planning on running anytime soon.
 
Last edited:
  • #23
No, I want Russert doing exactly what he's doing right now...

... pressuring Condi to run for president. :)

No, seriously, I think Russert is doing an unquestionable service to the nation through his show. Not all great leaders have to be politicians, you know.

In fact, we should stop looking to representative government for leaders, but amongst each other. That's what real democracy is supposed to be about, people.
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Would Tim Russert Make a Better President Than the Current Candidates?

1. Would Tim Russert's experience as a journalist make him a better president?

While Tim Russert's experience as a journalist may have given him valuable skills such as critical thinking, communication, and research, it does not necessarily translate to being an effective president. Being a journalist and being a political leader require different sets of skills and responsibilities.

2. How would Tim Russert's knowledge of politics and current events benefit him as a president?

Tim Russert's knowledge of politics and current events may give him an advantage in understanding the complexities of the political landscape. However, there are other important skills and qualities that are necessary for a successful presidency, such as leadership, decision-making, and diplomacy.

3. What are Tim Russert's political beliefs and policies?

As a journalist, Tim Russert was known for his impartiality and objectivity. It is unclear what his specific political beliefs and policies would be if he were to run for president. It is important for a candidate to have clear and well-defined beliefs and policies in order to gain the support of voters.

4. Would Tim Russert's lack of experience in government be a disadvantage in the presidency?

While Tim Russert may not have direct experience in government, his experience as a journalist and his knowledge of politics and current events may provide him with a unique perspective and fresh ideas. However, lack of experience in government may also present challenges in navigating the complexities of the political system.

5. How would Tim Russert's past interviews and interactions with politicians affect his presidency?

Tim Russert's past interviews and interactions with politicians may give him a deeper understanding of their personalities and policies. However, it could also lead to potential biases or conflicts of interest. As a president, it is important to maintain a level of impartiality and objectivity when dealing with political leaders.

Similar threads

Replies
87
Views
7K
Replies
10
Views
6K
Replies
40
Views
7K
Replies
29
Views
5K
Replies
78
Views
10K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
38
Views
4K
Replies
82
Views
18K
Back
Top