The RPs Debate Presidential Leadership: John Y. Defends

John Y.’s Third Defense

[John Y.’s Provocation;  The RP’s Rebuttal #1; Ron Granieri’s Rebuttal #2; Rod Jetton’s Rebuttal #3; Krystal Ball’s Rebuttal #4; John Y.’s First Defense; Rod Jetton’s Response #1; Jeff Smith’s Rebuttal #5; John Y.’s Second Defense; Ron Granieri’s Response #1]

Great point, Ron, but let me play the contrarian’s contrarian on looks and politics and point out that although I brought up the issue and am trying to make the case that we need to think more deliberately and deeply about the candidates than we do, I still seem to vote for the better looking ones myself.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that it’s important to be deep when discussing presidential politics, but don’t underestimate the shallow. Not because of shallow voters.

I think that is an unfair characterization (and NOT one you are making….but some do as you allude). But rather because what seems shallow to some is really much more important than the deep person is allowing it to be. That’s the whole liberal elite argument — and there’s something to that. Most great presidents weren’t great because they thought deeply or even brilliantly. They were great because they acted boldly and decisively (after thinking somewhat deeply).

That’s a lot of gobbledygook, but I think you know what I’m trying to say. I wish I were better looking and didn’t have to try so hard to explain my ideas in such painstaking detail, but it is what it  is.

And to add more sexism to this thread, I hope Krystal Ball chimes in again so I can complement her brilliance. Which is very real.

But if I am honest with myself, she is someone I’d like to have a bottled water with, too — at least more so than Ron or Rod. I’ve already had bottled water with Jeff and Jonathan and left disappointed both times.

Hope I’m not offending anyone, especially Krystal. I do want to be liked more than feared.