[MetroMan]

^ well said.

 

[Hydrogen]

Bush had six years as governor of one of the largest states. That's "experience". Cheney was a congressman, White House Chief of Staff and Defense Secretary. That's "experience". Richard Nixon was a congressman for six years and VP for eight years. That's "experience".

Excellent points.

 

[lordmandeep]

If you actually watched Bush when he was governor of Texas, he sounded like a good smart leader.

I wonder what kind of crap Dick Cheney did to his head...

 

[Hydrogen]

^No, if you actually listened to Bush while he was governor of Texas you knew he was an idiot.

 

[lordmandeep]

Well most politicians are idiots even if they speak well.


However Bush was able to form sentences and say large works without pausing.

Now he has a lot of trouble speaking.

 

[Blovertis]

Still on the subject of experience, let's not forget that the greatest of U.S. presidents, Abraham Lincoln, was on paper the least qualified when he took office in 1861. Besides his career as a country lawyer, he had only eight years in the Illinois state legislature, 1834-42, and a single term in the U.S. Congress, 1846-48.

Arguably the greatest leader of this country in modern times, Pierre Trudeau, had less than three years of parliamentary experience when he became prime minister.

At this level, experience is overrated. It's what the candidate says and how he says it that counts for much more.

 

[lordmandeep]

Do not forget his humble beginnings. When he was young, he had to read under gas powered streetlight to read a book.

 

[Edward]

At this level, experience is overrated. It's what the candidate says and how he says it that counts for much more.

What counts for most is results. I don't care how much experience Bush and Cheney brought to the table. They still messed up royally.

 

[Brandon716]

My my, how people forget.

THE reason President Bush was elected in the first place is because he was seen as a likeable, faithful person with good "values" in spite of everything else.

While Obama is a different person, I think voting for people on their frat boy skills has become the norm in America.

 

[lordmandeep]

Americans would never vote for a "smart" looking person really.

They want a buddy type guy.

If their leader shows some sort of elitism he's screwed.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Arguably the greatest leader of this country in modern times, Pierre Trudeau, had less than three years of parliamentary experience when he became prime minister.

Very arguably. Some might say that Trudeau took a great country with a strong post-war economy, little sense of the nanny-state, strong military, and a strong connection to its Franco-Anglo cultural roots, and turned it on its ear, introducing massive unprecedented (even during wartime) deficits, tearing the heart out of the forces, shoved the idea of the nanny state onto everyone, drove a stake through the cultural roots and alienated entire regions of the country.

 

[Blovertis]

FDR: Looked smart, was smart. Aristocratic bearing.
JFK: Looked smart, was smart. Aristocratic bearing.
Nixon: Looked smart, was smart (if also evil). Tried hard to pull off "man of the people" image, never quite succeeded.
Bush I: Fairly smart. Aristocratic bearing.

 

[Blovertis]

Very arguably. Some might say that Trudeau took a great country with a strong post-war economy, little sense of the nanny-state, strong military, and a strong connection to its Franco-Anglo cultural roots, and turned it on its ear, introducing massive unprecedented (even during wartime) deficits, tearing the heart out of the forces, shoved the idea of the nanny state onto everyone, drove a stake through the cultural roots and alienated entire regions of the country.

I don't disagree with you, but there is no denying that for all his inexperience, he came to office knowing what he wanted to accomplish and then proceeded to work toward his goals. Love him or hate him, he was a "leader".

 

[ShonTron]

Very arguably. Some might say that Trudeau took a great country with a strong post-war economy, little sense of the nanny-state, strong military, and a strong connection to its Franco-Anglo cultural roots, and turned it on its ear, introducing massive unprecedented (even during wartime) deficits, tearing the heart out of the forces, shoved the idea of the nanny state onto everyone, drove a stake through the cultural roots and alienated entire regions of the country.

If people think that, I hope they realize that Mulroney finished the job with even higher deficits, and alienated just about the entire country, and even led to Alberta and Quebec forming their own parties out of the corpse of the Progressive Conservatives. And his name still haunts us everytime there's a political scandal. And his son haunts us more than Trudeau's.

 

[lordmandeep]

Trudeau is like a Canadian legend due to his antics and is seen by Canadians to be the only cool real leader in the last 40 years.

Meaning Trudeau left with a bad legacy but due to Mulroney's childish idiotic nature, the 13 years of liberal boredom and the now Robotic Harper, people now look at Trudeau and say, he was so different.


It is like how Regan and Clinton are no so revered because what followed next was much worse and actually made those men look pretty good in comparison.


From this discussion, it just shows that Trudeau is not the best Canadian leader ever but is undoubtedly the most famous and most well known Prime Minister ever.