goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: steve dave on August 07, 2014, 08:14:23 AM
-
Everyone currently alive is in play here. No historic figures. No people "in their prime". Just people currently alive at their current age. The difference is they are forced to quit doing whatever they are doing and be the president and they can't be assholes about it. They have to do their best. I think Bill Gates would be really good. Plus he's one of those Bilderbergs that pike is always talking about so he's got tons of connections.
-
Saban.
Roll damn tide!
-
Jon Gruden probably
-
Is Justin Timberlake 35 yet? He is good at everything he tries, prolly be good at presidenting
-
Too bad Elon Musk is South African
-
Charles Koch would be pretty awesome. A libertarian and actual honest to God businessman who knows how to achieve efficiency and success in the private sector.
Ann Coulter would also be amazing.
-
Ann coulter would have us nuked out of existence the very first week after she made it illegal to be anything other than white and straight.
-
Oh Jesus KSUW
-
LHC Bill Snyder
-
LHC Bill Snyder
entire staff and all appointed positions would be family members and del miller
-
LHC Bill Snyder
entire staff and all appointed positions would be family members and del miller
Judge Arthur Brown!
-
Larry Page
-
Warren Buffet would also be really good if he wasn't so old. Luckily I think he would gladly run as VP on the Gates ticket.
-
Dog the Bounty Hunter
-
either damon or clooney. maybe a combined ticket.
-
Being a successful CEO would not make you a good president of the US because they are completely different jobs. They should buy themselves a congressional seat for a few terms to learn the lay of the land first.
-
affleck's city hall speech in jersey girl seemed to really get the people going, so maybe him?
-
Being a successful CEO would not make you a good president of the US because they are completely different jobs. They should buy themselves a congressional seat for a few terms to learn the lay of the land first.
I generally agree, but I think a genius computer programmer who has also demonstrated leadership ability at the CEO level would also probably be pretty good at being president.
-
Mr. Belding
-
Being a successful CEO would not make you a good president of the US because they are completely different jobs. They should buy themselves a congressional seat for a few terms to learn the lay of the land first.
See, the thing is, I don't think they should be completely different jobs. The primary task of a good CEO is to create efficiency - that's how you stay competitive. We could use more than a little efficiency in our bloated bureaucracy. Good CEOs also know how to delegate to other good people. In short, a CEO is exactly what we need running the Executive Branch.
Of course, the Legislature is a completely different animal, and the President has to be able to work with the Legislature to pass new laws, but I see no reason why a CEO can't do that, particularly a conservative legislature.
-
Ann coulter would have us nuked out of existence the very first week after she made it illegal to be anything other than white and straight.
I don't think President Coulter would make it illegal to be anything other than white or straight. For starters, I think President Coulter would understand that it is up to the Legislature to make new laws. Man, her press conferences would just be amazing. :love:
-
ann coulter would be holding a press conference right now to talk about putin having a tiny wang
-
Being a successful CEO would not make you a good president of the US because they are completely different jobs. They should buy themselves a congressional seat for a few terms to learn the lay of the land first.
I generally agree, but I think a genius computer programmer who has also demonstrated leadership ability at the CEO level would also probably be pretty good at being president.
I still think it would take some time to learn the ropes, which is why I suggested the congressional terms. Maybe but a governor seat instead?
You'd think there'd be an example of a CEO being a great president. I mean most conservatives' dream president was a friggin actor.
-
Being a successful CEO would not make you a good president of the US because they are completely different jobs. They should buy themselves a congressional seat for a few terms to learn the lay of the land first.
I generally agree, but I think a genius computer programmer who has also demonstrated leadership ability at the CEO level would also probably be pretty good at being president.
I still think it would take some time to learn the ropes, which is why I suggested the congressional terms. Maybe but a governor seat instead?
You'd think there'd be an example of a CEO being a great president. I mean most conservatives' dream president was a friggin actor.
I don't think CEOs are very good at winning elections. You are right that experience at a lower level would help, but I'm not sure it's really necessary.
-
I don't think CEOs are very good at winning elections.
What do you think is the reason for that?
-
Pop and Sumlin
-
being electible in this country is a real barrier to having a good president. we have huge amounts of people that will vote for/against someone based on single issues like abortion, religion, race, sex, political party, etc. that's why my "sd selects the president without taking your dumbass opinions into account plan" is the best solution for our country.
-
I don't think CEOs are very good at winning elections.
What do you think is the reason for that?
I'm not really sure. Herman Cain was doing really well in the polls until the sex scandal stuff came out. I never would have voted for him, though. 9/9/9 was a terrible idea.
-
being electible in this country is a real barrier to having a good president. we have huge amounts of people that will vote for/against someone based on single issues like abortion stance, religion, race, sex, political party, etc. that's why my "sd selects the president without taking your dumbass opinions into account plan" is the best solution for our country.
I think Bill Gates would be electable. He is a good person.
-
Could someone like Bill Gates do more for humanity in his current status than if he was president? I think it's possible.
-
Pop and Sumlin
If you mean Popovich then absolutely. Also Frank for Press Secretary
-
I don't think CEOs are very good at winning elections.
What do you think is the reason for that?
Because they're not very good at politics? The question posed was not "who has the best shot at winning." I think it would be a refreshing change of pace to have a president who is not beholden to all the petty politcal bullshit. You know, maybe a president that would actualy give a crap about government efficiency, wouldn't make all decisions based on pleasing one interest group or another, would't spend most of his time on vacation and/or fundraising on the taxpayer dime, etc.
-
Could someone like Bill Gates do more for humanity in his current status than if he was president? I think it's possible.
maybe. but that is not a factor in the thread (not saying you are saying it is)
-
Charles Koch would be pretty awesome. A libertarian and actual honest to God businessman who knows how to achieve efficiency and success in the private sector.
Ann Coulter would also be amazing.
Ok. Now you are playing your hand a little too strongly, ksu wildcats.
-
Could someone like Bill Gates do more for humanity in his current status than if he was president? I think it's possible.
Depends on who the president ends up being if it's not Bill Gates, really.
-
The problem with presidents is that no normal cool person would ever want to do that job.
-
I think it would be a refreshing change of pace to have a president who is not beholden to all the petty politcal bullshit.
You say this, but I think we all know that you are way too beholden to the petty political bullshit to believe it.
-
I don't think CEOs are very good at winning elections.
What do you think is the reason for that?
Because they're not very good at politics? The question posed was not "who has the best shot at winning." I think it would be a refreshing change of pace to have a president who is not beholden to all the petty politcal bullshit. You know, maybe a president that would actualy give a crap about government efficiency, wouldn't make all decisions based on pleasing one interest group or another, would't spend most of his time on vacation and/or fundraising on the taxpayer dime, etc.
Maybe they are bad at politics because they don't understand what the public wants? And shouldn't elected officials represent the wants of their constituents?
Also, I don't think the people REALLY want government to be run "efficiently". I mean, everyone says they do until their favorite program gets efficiency-ed.
-
The problem with presidents is that no normal cool person would ever want to do that job.
Plenty of normal cool people would love to do the job. It's just that normal people don't like the idea of campaigning for a job.
-
Maybe the problem is our form of government? :horrorsurprise:
-
Bill Gates gives an awful lot of money to Democrats, and I'm not really sure why. To be sure, he's brilliant, but at some point maybe you're so smart that you actually fool yourself into believing that "the problem isn't the size of government - it just needs to be run better"? Warren Buffet falls into the same camp.
If we're talking CEOs, Charles Koch is a much better choice because he understands that government is inherently ineffecient and anti-liberty, and should be reduced.
-
steve dave 4 President!
-
The problem with presidents is that no normal cool person would ever want to do that job.
Plenty of normal cool people would love to do the job. It's just that normal people don't like the idea of campaigning for a job.
Well obviously I'm including that as part of the job.
-
steve dave 4 President!
Maybe vice president or a cabinet seat. I'm #TeamKrustyKrustyMichiganCat
-
I think it would be a refreshing change of pace to have a president who is not beholden to all the petty politcal bullshit.
You say this, but I think we all know that you are way too beholden to the petty political bullshit to believe it.
That's not a fair statement. I am a conservative first and foremost. I am not beholden to either party's talking points - but I am pragmatic enough to understand that the GOP is definitely the lesser of the two evils we currently have available. I hate petty political bullshit - I want common sense solutions.
-
The problem with presidents is that no normal cool person would ever want to do that job.
Plenty of normal cool people would love to do the job. It's just that normal people don't like the idea of campaigning for a job.
Correct.
-
Bill Gates gives an awful lot of money to Democrats, and I'm not really sure why. To be sure, he's brilliant, but at some point maybe you're so smart that you actually fool yourself into believing that "the problem isn't the size of government - it just needs to be run better"? Warren Buffet falls into the same camp.
If we're talking CEOs, Charles Koch is a much better choice because he understands that government is inherently ineffecient and anti-liberty, and should be reduced.
gates just cares a lot too much about other people. it's a problem in really smart people, i agree. koch might just as smart but because he was born worth $300 million he grew up defending his fortune from the government.
-
I think it would be a refreshing change of pace to have a president who is not beholden to all the petty politcal bullshit.
You say this, but I think we all know that you are way too beholden to the petty political bullshit to believe it.
That's not a fair statement. I am a conservative first and foremost. I am not beholden to either party's talking points - but I am pragmatic enough to understand that the GOP is definitely the lesser of the two evils we currently have available. I hate petty political bullshit - I want common sense solutions.
Beep boop. I am k-s-u wilcats, I am robot. Beep boop.
-
Oh man, how did I forget Charles Krauthammer? That's my choice. Charles Koch for VP. What an amazing ticket. The "Charles in Charge" campaign.
-
an elite coach would definitely make the best president. make a list of the 10 best coaches then find the one who wants to be president the least and force him or her to run.
-
The problem with presidents is that no normal cool person would ever want to do that job.
Plenty of normal cool people would love to do the job. It's just that normal people don't like the idea of campaigning for a job.
Correct.
So they're too lazy to put in the work required? They just want it handed to them? I don't think this person would be a very good president.
-
The problem with presidents is that no normal cool person would ever want to do that job.
Plenty of normal cool people would love to do the job. It's just that normal people don't like the idea of campaigning for a job.
Correct.
So they're to lazy to put in the work required? They just want it handed to them? I don't think this person would be a very good president.
SD just wants to hand out presidencies left and right like skittles on a Sunday
-
The problem with presidents is that no normal cool person would ever want to do that job.
Plenty of normal cool people would love to do the job. It's just that normal people don't like the idea of campaigning for a job.
Correct.
So they're too lazy to put in the work required? They just want it handed to them? I don't think this person would be a very good president.
:jerk:
-
The problem with presidents is that no normal cool person would ever want to do that job.
Plenty of normal cool people would love to do the job. It's just that normal people don't like the idea of campaigning for a job.
Correct.
So they're too lazy to put in the work required? They just want it handed to them? I don't think this person would be a very good president.
:jerk:
I was half joking, but think about it. I think it's good to have a president that cares about people and wants to make the world a better place all around. If someone (who already has all the money they already need) isn't willing to invest the time and money required to run a successful campaign, they probably don't give a crap about the general public.
-
The problem is what running a successful campaign requires
-
Bob Costas.
-
When making companies more efficient, CEOs have to make decisions that are unpopular with many employees. When those employees have a vote each, unpopular decisions don't get ppl re-elected.
-
The problem is what running a successful campaign requires
Elaborate
-
Petraeus
-
The problem is what running a successful campaign requires
Elaborate
The fundraising alone would be hell for me. Then you would have to put out advertisements, respond to attacks, constantly do interviews, etc. It just sounds soul crushing to me. I actually would enjoy traveling the country and riding in parades, though.
Why would anyone who already is in a position to get a very good job based upon their merits spend 2-3 years of their life campaigning for a job that essentially comes down to the whims of the general public?
-
When making companies more efficient, CEOs have to make decisions that are unpopular with many employees. When those employees have a vote each, unpopular decisions don't get ppl re-elected.
I think this is valid. They also have to deal with what is kind of similar to a 535 person board of directors to get anything done. Like I hinted at, I don't think a CEO could make a good leader of the executive branch under our current system of government. And apparently our election system also makes it impossible for the best person to get elected to our highest office. Hmmm.
-
Why would anyone who already is in a position to get a very good job based upon their merits spend 2-3 years of their life campaigning for a job that essentially comes down to the whims of the general public?
Because they would have the means to do so and have a deep, genuine desire to make the United States a better place?
-
The problem is what running a successful campaign requires
Elaborate
Like taking money for unethical reasons from rich people and corporations who later want favors. I realize that there may not be any better way to do it, and money in politics may be inevitable, but it still is a flawed system.
-
Why would anyone who already is in a position to get a very good job based upon their merits spend 2-3 years of their life campaigning for a job that essentially comes down to the whims of the general public?
Because they would have the means to do so and have a deep, genuine desire to make the United States a better place?
I just think that the odds that you genuinely care about people and making america better and are not a sociopath, and also are willing to do what it takes to become president are probably pretty low. I mean, it's probably happened but the odds are low.
-
Why would anyone who already is in a position to get a very good job based upon their merits spend 2-3 years of their life campaigning for a job that essentially comes down to the whims of the general public?
Because they would have the means to do so and have a deep, genuine desire to make the United States a better place?
They also have the means to be CEO of a fortune 500 company and they can just wake up tomorrow and go do that. If POTUS were a position that you could just interview for, I think you would see more CEO types interested. No normal person would look at what is required in running a successful campaign and decide that they want to do that.
-
When making companies more efficient, CEOs have to make decisions that are unpopular with many employees. When those employees have a vote each, unpopular decisions don't get ppl re-elected.
I think this is valid. They also have to deal with what is kind of similar to a 535 person board of directors to get anything done. Like I hinted at, I don't think a CEO could make a good leader of the executive branch under our current system of government. And apparently our election system also makes it impossible for the best person to get elected to our highest office. Hmmm.
The president is CEO of the executive branch. He doesn't need approval of the 535 members of Congress to make massive changes to the executive (i.e. bureaucracy). That'd be a good start in and of itself.
-
Mitt Romney was almost president. Think about that.
-
When making companies more efficient, CEOs have to make decisions that are unpopular with many employees. When those employees have a vote each, unpopular decisions don't get ppl re-elected.
The whole "re-elected" thing seems to be a big part of the problem. What would you say was the last successful, productive second term? Reagan? Clinton, GWB, and Obama are/were trainwrecks. JFC, look at Obama's second term. Aside from his threats to unconstitutionally usurp the power of the legislature, the guy's already a lame duck. Four more wasted years, and another 4 trillion or so added to the national debt without any change in fiscal policy.
-
Mitt Romney was almost president. Think about that.
A Mitt Romney first term might have actually had a prayer of accomplishing something, as opposed to re-electing Obama to 4 years of lame duck status. Think about that.
-
Why would anyone who already is in a position to get a very good job based upon their merits spend 2-3 years of their life campaigning for a job that essentially comes down to the whims of the general public?
Because they would have the means to do so and have a deep, genuine desire to make the United States a better place?
I just think that the odds that you genuinely care about people and making america better and are not a sociopath, and also are willing to do what it takes to become president are probably pretty low. I mean, it's probably happened but the odds are low.
A CEO theoretically wouldn't need to take money from corporations. Although I do chuckle at the idea of Charles Koch having a moral objection with dirty politics and special interests. (I know you weren't necessarily referring to him, but still).
Why would anyone who already is in a position to get a very good job based upon their merits spend 2-3 years of their life campaigning for a job that essentially comes down to the whims of the general public?
Because they would have the means to do so and have a deep, genuine desire to make the United States a better place?
They also have the means to be CEO of a fortune 500 company and they can just wake up tomorrow and go do that. If POTUS were a position that you could just interview for, I think you would see more CEO types interested. No normal person would look at what is required in running a successful campaign and decide that they want to do that.
I don't think a "normal person" would be a very good president, (or CEO, for that matter). And you still seem to miss my point - I think a president should care enough about the constituents to make the effort to run a campaign. If they'd rather wake up and run a fortune 500 company, they probably wouldn't care enough to make a good president.
-
Mitt Romney was almost president. Think about that.
A Mitt Romney first term might have actually had a prayer of accomplishing something, as opposed to re-electing Obama to 4 years of lame duck status. Think about that.
I don't even really care about that. Just the fact that that was the best they could come up with is incredible.
-
LHC Bill Snyder
-
Like, I have some friends that probably could have beaten out obama in that election. But of course they are normal people and would never want to be president.
-
Like, I have some friends that probably could have beaten out obama in that election. But of course they are normal people and would never want to be president.
No normal person would ever be able to win the republican primary in today's political climate.
-
Who was the last "normal" guy who had a shot at being president? I guess Clinton was relatively normal but the Repubs and Dems since then have been complete weirdos:
W Bush (lol)
Gore (lol)
Kerry (double lol)
McCain (1/2 normal half lol)
Obama (seems kinda normal? drank a bud light at Bryant's, but still mostly weird. lol)
Romney (lol Xs 100)
-
maybe abraham lincoln. but he was a manic depressive, so...
-
When making companies more efficient, CEOs have to make decisions that are unpopular with many employees. When those employees have a vote each, unpopular decisions don't get ppl re-elected.
I think this is valid. They also have to deal with what is kind of similar to a 535 person board of directors to get anything done. Like I hinted at, I don't think a CEO could make a good leader of the executive branch under our current system of government. And apparently our election system also makes it impossible for the best person to get elected to our highest office. Hmmm.
The president is CEO of the executive branch. He doesn't need approval of the 535 members of Congress to make massive changes to the executive (i.e. bureaucracy). That'd be a good start in and of itself.
I'm sure you've given Obama plenty of props for (fairly significantly) cutting that budget:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2015-eop-budget_03132014.pdf
-
Which gE Blogger Do You Think Would Make The Best President?
-
The reality of our current system is that we are much closer to choosing our pres through a reality tv show like system than we are through a system that provides the ability for the best suited person for the job actually getting elected.
Most CEO's are considered bastards by half the ppl that work for them or deal with them in biz, and that is without hiring ppl to dig into every single mistake ever made. CEOs on the campaign trail would ultimately lead to nuclear meltdown campaigns for us to watch as the next career politician dances around the fire and into office.
-
Who was the last "normal" guy who had a shot at being president? I guess Clinton was relatively normal but the Repubs and Dems since then have been complete weirdos:
W Bush (lol)
Gore (lol)
Kerry (double lol)
McCain (1/2 normal half lol)
Obama (seems kinda normal? drank a bud light at Bryant's, but still mostly weird. lol)
Romney (lol Xs 100)
It's McCain.
-
Who was the last "normal" guy who had a shot at being president? I guess Clinton was relatively normal but the Repubs and Dems since then have been complete weirdos:
W Bush (lol)
Gore (lol)
Kerry (double lol)
McCain (1/2 normal half lol)
Obama (seems kinda normal? drank a bud light at Bryant's, but still mostly weird. lol)
Romney (lol Xs 100)
It's McCain.
yeah. when i saw mccain playing iphone poker during that meeting i was like, "yeah, this guy gets it.".
-
Jon Stewart. Tons of you guys know this but are too worried about your moderate cred to admit it. Sad, really...
-
Jon Stewart. Tons of you guys know this but are too worried about your moderate cred to admit it. Sad, really...
Pass
-
The reality of our current system is that we are much closer to choosing our pres through a reality tv show like system than we are through a system that provides the ability for the best suited person for the job actually getting elected.
Most CEO's are considered bastards by half the ppl that work for them or deal with them in biz, and that is without hiring ppl to dig into every single mistake ever made. CEOs on the campaign trail would ultimately lead to nuclear meltdown campaigns for us to watch as the next career politician dances around the fire and into office.
Also most CEO's are pretty much interchangeable and at the mercy of the economy when they take charge.
-
Which gE Blogger Do You Think Would Make The Best President?
PH69 would flip the script
-
The reality of our current system is that we are much closer to choosing our pres through a reality tv show like system than we are through a system that provides the ability for the best suited person for the job actually getting elected.
Most CEO's are considered bastards by half the ppl that work for them or deal with them in biz, and that is without hiring ppl to dig into every single mistake ever made. CEOs on the campaign trail would ultimately lead to nuclear meltdown campaigns for us to watch as the next career politician dances around the fire and into office.
Also most CEO's are pretty much interchangeable and at the mercy of the economy when they take charge.
Maybe they can be president...
-
Which gE Blogger Do You Think Would Make The Best President?
http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=32094.0
-
I would be a very good president
-
The reality of our current system is that we are much closer to choosing our pres through a reality tv show like system than we are through a system that provides the ability for the best suited person for the job actually getting elected.
Most CEO's are considered bastards by half the ppl that work for them or deal with them in biz, and that is without hiring ppl to dig into every single mistake ever made. CEOs on the campaign trail would ultimately lead to nuclear meltdown campaigns for us to watch as the next career politician dances around the fire and into office.
Also most CEO's are pretty much interchangeable and at the mercy of the economy when they take charge.
Maybe they can be president...
hmmm....
-
Which gE Blogger Do You Think Would Make The Best President?
http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=32094.0
never happened
-
I would be a very good president
Picky eaters can't be presidents. You're suppose to eat the cities food when visiting. It would be your biggest nightmare.
-
Stewart/Colbert
dead serious
-
Has Elizabeth Warren been mentioned yet?
-
The Reich guy from Cal might make a decent prez.
-
Has Elizabeth Warren been mentioned yet?
Gary Johnson!
-
Wouldn't LHC LHC Bill Snyder make a good president?
(I know luked but I was really analyzing this thread and agreed)
-
being electible in this country is a real barrier to having a good president. we have huge amounts of people that will vote for/against someone based on single issues like abortion, religion, race, sex, political party, etc. that's why my "sd selects the president without taking your dumbass opinions into account plan" is the best solution for our country.
:thumbs: somehow I missed this post.
-
Bill Clinton or Michael Bloomberg
-
Michael Bloomberg is a good pick
-
Michael Bloomberg is a good pick
His policies on soda portions would divide this country.
-
<insert generic cynical political post here>
stupid politics! :shakesfist:
-
<insert generic cynical political post here>
stupid politics! :shakesfist:
this isn't enjoyable without the actual post
-
<insert generic cynical political post here>
stupid politics! :shakesfist:
this isn't enjoyable without the actual post
oh ok
-
Corporations, money, something about haliburton, constitution, something about libtards, Obama.
Stupid politics! :shakesfist:
-
Michael Bloomberg is a good pick
CEO/Politician. Republican/Democrat/Independent. He's got all the bases covered.
And he was a "benevolent dictator" as mayor. Which was a good thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eohHwsplvY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eohHwsplvY)
-
Mark Cuban would be interesting. I would interview him for the position. That Adam Silver guy seems to be kicking ass with the NBA at the moment.
I wonder if you went up to people and just offered them the position with no campaigning involved, how many would accept?
-
Dnr. Sd.
Gonna win 'em all!
-
Mark Cuban would be interesting. I would interview him for the position. That Adam Silver guy seems to be kicking ass with the NBA at the moment.
I wonder if you went up to people and just offered them the position with no campaigning involved, how many would accept?
I'm sure a lot of them would. It's really tricky, because everyone seems to acknowledge that a major problem with politics today is that elected officials are beholden to the corporations that fund their campaigns. But we think handing a super rich person money wouldn't govern with keeping and growing their businesses and fortunes being a major issue for them?
-
Mark Cuban would be interesting. I would interview him for the position. That Adam Silver guy seems to be kicking ass with the NBA at the moment.
I wonder if you went up to people and just offered them the position with no campaigning involved, how many would accept?
I'm sure a lot of them would. It's really tricky, because everyone seems to acknowledge that a major problem with politics today is that elected officials are beholden to the corporations that fund their campaigns. But we think handing a super rich person money wouldn't govern with keeping and growing their businesses and fortunes being a major issue for them?
Being rich is somewhat of an indicator of success, rightly or wrongly.
Also, Neil Degrasse Tyson would be interesting as president.
-
Mark Cuban would be interesting. I would interview him for the position. That Adam Silver guy seems to be kicking ass with the NBA at the moment.
I wonder if you went up to people and just offered them the position with no campaigning involved, how many would accept?
I'm sure a lot of them would. It's really tricky, because everyone seems to acknowledge that a major problem with politics today is that elected officials are beholden to the corporations that fund their campaigns. But we think handing a super rich person money wouldn't govern with keeping and growing their businesses and fortunes being a major issue for them?
Being rich is somewhat of an indicator of success, rightly or wrongly.
So is getting elected to the senate.
-
Also, Neil Degrasse Tyson would be interesting as president.
This is a pretty good idea. I think a brilliant historian of world politics and civilization would also be pretty good.
-
Also, Neil Degrasse Tyson would be interesting as president.
This is a pretty good idea. I think a brilliant historian of world politics and civilization would also be pretty good.
kat kid!
-
Charles Barkley
-
Charles Barkley
Pretty ideal. I mean, would not put up w Putin's crap. That's for sure.
Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk
-
Also, Neil Degrasse Tyson would be interesting as president.
This is a pretty good idea. I think a brilliant historian of world politics and civilization would also be pretty good.
He is obviously brilliant, but he's kind of an ass about it. It's cool because I basically agree with him, but a lot of the country would burn the White House down with him in charge.
-
Also, Neil Degrasse Tyson would be interesting as president.
This is a pretty good idea. I think a brilliant historian of world politics and civilization would also be pretty good.
He is obviously brilliant, but he's kind of an ass about it. It's cool because I basically agree with him, but a lot of the country would burn the White House down with him in charge.
Yea, but I am curious as to what advances we could make in science with the emphasis put there
-
I like Neil Degrasse Tyson although i think he's a huge Libtard.
I'd say the creators of South Park. Would be incredible
-
Huge libtards pike
-
You know what makes people sound really dumb? Using the "word" "libtard".
-
Great "message boarding"
-
You call those "words" "words"? It's not even close.
-
Now pick a female minority.
-
Margaret Cho
-
My mistress
-
Margaret Cho
^ bonus points for bisexual
-
My mistress
Damn the Luke.
-
Margaret Cho
^ bonus points for bisexual
Condoleeeeeza!
-
Buncha libtards in this thread
-
A couple conservadummies too though :surprised:
-
And at least one robot. Beep Boop.
-
Huge libtards pike
Disagree. Very reasonably moderate imo
-
I'm really surprised that my Charles Barkley nomination didn't get more traction.
-
I'm really surprised that my Charles Barkley nomination didn't get more traction.
he could be sd's veep.
Gonna win 'em all!
-
Probably me.. I would make sure only the fittest and smartest were able to reproduce
-
Probably me.. I would make sure only the fittest and smartest were able to reproduce
:frown:
-
Probably me.. I would make sure only the fittest and smartest were able to reproduce
:frown:
youre not getting hunger games'd and you can keep your dog!
-
win win
-
Lolz donald trump for prez 2016
-
Which gE Blogger Do You Think Would Make The Best President?
PoetWarrior.