08 elections criteria - who was born the poorest?

[Mass]

Obviously, this should have no importance, except eventually as a character indication among many others, but it seems that it will be important in 08, or at least that many candidates, Democrats and Republicans alike, seem this is important.

I noticed this post on "political insider", concerning Tommy Thomson:
The Republican Candidate Everyone is Overlooking

3) Personal story - He was born to humble roots in Elroy, Wisconsin, and is the perfect example of local boy makes good. He earned his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Wisconsin and was a state representative, along with being a lawyer. He tells a great story about his wife surviving breast cancer and becoming a strong advocate on women's health issues. His daughter had breast cancer also, at a young age, and the drugs made her unable to bear children. So she had an egg frozen and his grandbaby was born healthy, beating the odds.

On the Republican side, add Chuck Hagel's story: father alcoholic after WWII, orphan at 16 with 3 younger siblings, not enough money to go to college, ... Hucklabee has been claiming his modest upbringing as well. Not sure what is the background of Brownback ,Guliani.

As for the Democrats, Jon Stewart gets the story in a sketch last week. Winner: Tom Vilsack.


Let's the primary start. Who has the saddest story?

:sarcasm: (just in case some people missed that it was sarcastic)

[LisaM]

1. The interesting thing about that is that it's been posited

in the Bush family biographies I've read (both pro and con) that they seem to have a firmly held belief that high office is really the purview of the wealthy and the elite. Those who have run for office have amassed personal wealth first (through their so-called "jobs"), only running for office once their fortune was established. I have also heard that they always held his humble roots against Clinton, because he proved that leaders could be made, not just born.

[Mass]

3. Totally absurd hypothesis. The family you are born in should not

be a factor in itself, either poor or rich.

The problem is that it seems that one of the meme this year will be that "the poorer the better", which is as stupid as "the richer, the better".

[LisaM]

15. Well *I* don't believe that!

It's just what I've read about how the Bush family thinks.

[mzmolly]

13. It's also interesting to read some of the original debate on the constitution.

Some argued that commoners should not be able to vote, for example. Some of that same mentality exists today, though in slightly different cloth.

[twilight_sailing]

2. "a character indication"

Granted, growing up poor MIGHT lead to compassion later on in a successful life. But it isn't a given.

[Mass]

4. Not compassion, how you react to difficulties.

[twilight_sailing]

5. Mabye.

[twilight_sailing]

6. and maybe not

;)

[emulatorloo]

8. I want somebody with an affinity for the underdog

FDR had that. The Kennedys had that. That is pretty much what matters to me.

[geardaddy]

9. Bingo. n/t

[Mass]

11. exactly.

[geardaddy]

7. How pathetic.

How about focusing on what they are today? Hmmm?

So, someone who is poor overcomes all obstacels to become a presidential candidate. Good for them. But will he/she be a good president? What about someone who grew up in the middle class (what's that again?) or someone who grew up as a trust fund baby? The same question applies: will he/she be a good president?

[DaveJ]

10. I think it's important

I truly believe that someone from a normal background makes a better leader, for two reasons:

1) Those from posh privileged backgrounds have no idea what it's like to be normal and therefore can't address our problems.
2) Having leaders from elite backgrounds destroys the confidence in the public that they too can succeed in life.

I think number 2 is much more important.

Someone from an unprivileged background can in some cases come from a background that has damaged him or her, but I'd rather trust someone damaged from hard times than a rich guy who has no idea what hard times are.

[Mass]

12. Obviously Kennedy and JFK were lousy president. Gore and Kerry would have been.

:sarcasm:

And Cheney and Nixon, with their perfectly "ordinary" origins, cared about regular people.

[DaveJ]

14. Not great comparisons

The Kennedy family was relatively new wealth originating as poor Irish immigrants. Joseph Kennedy own Merchandise Mart a few blocks away from where I am now, but made much of his money bootlegging. I don't think the Kennedy's bond with the normal people was ever destroyed. Similarly I would not have a problem with the Clinton family.

Cheney was not elected, so I don't consider him a leader of the people. As far as Nixon goes, he's a lot better than what we face today in politics, however appeared to suffer some mental problems. Moreover I would not vote for those two because of their political affiliation anyway.

[LisaM]

16. I agree about the Kennedys but what about FDR?

I think he was arguably the President who had the clearest view on what government and ociety owe to their citizens, and he was certainly a person of privilege.

[DaveJ]

17. Honestly... I did not notice the sarcasm in the OP as first

Anyway, you guys are killin' me here. So what about FDR? I think FDR did what he had to do, there was no choice, in order to get us out of the Great Depression. Even the wealthiest need a functioning country in order for their own business ventures to survive. So it's no surprise many of the richest and entrepreneurial business leaders are Democrats.

Another factor to consider is that we are in a more technocratic society now, which is less blue collar than before, where there is less distinction between government bureaucrats and workers. I would suppose that in the 1930's being 'normal' meant without higher education. Not today, when average people usually are just as educated as our leaders.

Of course, the bottom line is that I'm not saying the rich are incapable of being good leaders. For any job there is an abundance of qualified people to fill it. But given the choice, if it ever came down to who I trust more, and who I think would inspire us to succeed, I would choose someone with a normal socioeconomic background. People should be able to tell their kids that if they try and study hard they can be the next President.

[earthlover]

18. Wes Clark had humble roots...

...raised by his mother who was a bank secretary. I think Clark can identify with the working class. He also got where he is by a lot of hard work and dedication.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

19. Duncan Hunter has a hard luck story, probably not true but...

Claims he was forced to drop out of university for financial reasons, joined the military and went back to school via the G.I. Bill - claims to have been one of the Amerians who picked fruit for minumum wage.

The G.I. Bill part is true, I am pretty suspect of the rest.

[rep the dems]

20. Kucinich's story seems pretty sad, except that he keeps smiling as

he tells it.