Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
S/O experience thread on E08
History has shown that, in general, senators do not make good presidents.
Someone responded with this quote and I am wondering where she got this information from. Seems wishy-washy to me, because 1) What makes a "good" president is highly disputed, and 2) Fifteen presidents were senetors first, and the list includes:
James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, John Tyler, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Benjamin Harrison, Warren G. Harding, Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon.
Which of these were not 'good presidents'?
As it relates to this thread, I thought I should point out that only 16 presidents were governors first (some of territories rather than states).
So, what kind of experience do you think is most relevant to being President? In what ways does being in the senate prepare one for the presidency, and in what ways is it lacking in preparation?
Re: S/O experience thread on E08
I bet most people don't know anything about half those presidents - anything they did or any big events that happened during their tenures. Except for Nixon, JFK, LBJ, Truman & maybe Andrew Johnson. The rest are the "flyover country" of Presidents.
When people think of their favorite presidents they think of Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, FDR, & Reagan, all non-senators.
ETA: Truman. I think (hope) most people know about the A-bomb.
I think a mixture of experiences would make the best President. My ideal resume would look something like:
Enlist in military after highschool (use GI Bill for College)
B.S. in Economics and B.A. or B.S. in Political Sci
MBA in Management and M.S. in Econ
work in real life
city council (city over 100K pop preferred)
Mayor (1 term)
US Representative (2 full terms)
Governor (2 full terms)
Then run for president this would make the candidate about 54 and said candidate would have a background which would set them up to be successful.
Maybe. I think people put their rose-colored glasses on when viewing his achievements (he started Vietnam). I think most people view him as a "could have been the best" but not b/c of the tragedy. He didn't even complete his entire term. Or maybe not. I don't know. He's probably the only one on that list that deserves to be even considered for the "best of" category.