Consensus Takers or Leaders?

[PlatinumGold]

seems like lately what we have for "Leaders" aren't leaders at all.

they build a power base of voters and then constantly try to convince those voters that the "leader" is doing everything the voters wanted them to do.

Clinton, what a disappointment, i actually thought that he would be a leader during the primaries for his first term. even when running for his second term, i thought maybe he could show some leadership. what i found was, he was just a consensus taker.

when will we see real leadership in this country again? i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

if the person that wants to run doesn't have better ideas than the rest of us and must constantly rely on polls of what WE think before he can make a decision, HOW does that qualify him to be a LEADER?

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Bush anyone?

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Bush anyone?

do you REALLY believe that Bush is following his OWN agenda?

i personally don't.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Bush anyone?

do you REALLY believe that Bush is following his OWN agenda?

i personally don't.

Whose agenda is it?

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Bush anyone?

do you REALLY believe that Bush is following his OWN agenda?

i personally don't.

Whose agenda is it?

who is benefitting the most?

 

[dimensionOFdissension]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Bush anyone?

do you REALLY believe that Bush is following his OWN agenda?

i personally don't.

Whose agenda is it?

The Project for the New American Century

It was all laid out for us in the late 90s.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: dimensionOFdissension

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Bush anyone?

do you REALLY believe that Bush is following his OWN agenda?

i personally don't.

Whose agenda is it?

The Project for the New American Century

It was all laid out for us in the late 90s.

And certain sectors of big business.

 

[dimensionOFdissension]

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: dimensionOFdissension

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Bush anyone?

do you REALLY believe that Bush is following his OWN agenda?

i personally don't.

Whose agenda is it?

The Project for the New American Century

It was all laid out for us in the late 90s.

And certain sectors of big business.

Most certainly. The interests of certain sectors of corporate America and the interests of the PNAC crowd are mutually inclusive.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
seems like lately what we have for "Leaders" aren't leaders at all.

they build a power base of voters and then constantly try to convince those voters that the "leader" is doing everything the voters wanted them to do.

Clinton, what a disappointment, i actually thought that he would be a leader during the primaries for his first term. even when running for his second term, i thought maybe he could show some leadership. what i found was, he was just a consensus taker.

when will we see real leadership in this country again? i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

if the person that wants to run doesn't have better ideas than the rest of us and must constantly rely on polls of what WE think before he can make a decision, HOW does that qualify him to be a LEADER?

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Read and ye shall learn why politicians are constantly taking opinion polls.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
seems like lately what we have for "Leaders" aren't leaders at all.

they build a power base of voters and then constantly try to convince those voters that the "leader" is doing everything the voters wanted them to do.

Clinton, what a disappointment, i actually thought that he would be a leader during the primaries for his first term. even when running for his second term, i thought maybe he could show some leadership. what i found was, he was just a consensus taker.

when will we see real leadership in this country again? i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

if the person that wants to run doesn't have better ideas than the rest of us and must constantly rely on polls of what WE think before he can make a decision, HOW does that qualify him to be a LEADER?

i want REAL leadership even if it is down a path i don't agree with. at least that way i can either change my mind about that path because it was indeed the right one OR i can disagree with that path.

Read and ye shall learn why politicians are constantly taking opinion polls.

i'm not unfamiliar with the material you have linked but you seem to have missed my point.

i still believe, most people at heart WANT to be lead. and in the absence of true leadership demand that politicians cater to their every whim.

 

[senseamp]

Leaders don't usually come out of prosperous and peaceful times. And there is a reason for that. During these times, people don't want to be lead anywhere, they just want the leader to not fvck it up. It's when things are bad that they want a leader to show them the way to a better place. It's just human nature.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Leaders don't usually come out of prosperous and peaceful times. And there is a reason for that. During these times, people don't want to be lead anywhere, they just want the leader to not fvck it up. It's when things are bad that they want a leader to show them the way to a better place. It's just human nature.

i could see that.

but i think times are worse now than people think they are.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

i'm not unfamiliar with the material you have linked but you seem to have missed my point.

i still believe, most people at heart WANT to be lead. and in the absence of true leadership demand that politicians cater to their every whim.

People are being led alright. They are being led like a dog on a leash.

True leadership is a consentual/contractual relationship. If I'm a football player I may look to my coach of leadership, or if I go to a church I might look to my pastor as a leader, or perhaps there is a leader at your work that takes charge when a project gets rough.

But suppose the coach makes a bad decision, or your pastor gave you bad advice about your marriage or you were upset about the decision the team leader at your work made. In each of these cases you have the ability to weigh these negative decisions against the rest. For instance, maybe coach is great 99% of the time and it was just a couple times you didn't like how he ran the team, likewise with the pastor or work project leader.

Imagine if the opposite occurred though. Suppose you really didn't like coach at all after awhile, or you found out your pastor secretly worshipped Satan or you absolutely could not stand your team leader at work. In this case you have the possibility to exit that relationship. You can quit the team, you can go to a different church and even quit your job. In none of those cases do you have to pack up all your things and hit the road in order to get away from their spheres of influence.

When it comes to a politician on the other hand there is no weighing of the good and the bad to be done. The politician's edicts are absolute. Disobey and you may wind up in prison. And if you want to escape the politician's political influence you have to move away entirely. Hence, it disgusts me to hear when someone says that politicians are 'leaders.'

A much better analogy is that they are much more like slavemasters.

Now back to the point regarding politicians taking opinion polls. They do these because of self-preservation. They want to be re-elected. The vast majority of the time politicians are not going to do anything that is unpopular in their district. This is out of self interest. Sometimes a politician might sacrifice his political career in order to do something unpopular, but that is a rarity. The vast vast majority of the time the politician is going to maintain the status quo and stay the course towards re-election.

 

[CSMR]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
when will we see real leadership in this country again? i'd vote for someone who had real ideas of his own (even if i disagreed with him) and was willing to push certain agendas consistently and not let the "will" of the people constantly sway him.

The pollsters will check you out, and if there are enough of you, you will get leaders who will appear firm, who will have independent-minded agendas and speeches made for them, to get your votes.