For decades, Republicans have said they want a president
who will run the government like a business. And for decades those who
understand the workings of the federal government have said that running a
business has virtually nothing in common with running the public sector of the United
States.

With corporate executives Donald Trump and Carly Fiorina
atop the Republican presidential polls, the newest critic to step up is Trevor Hayes of the Independent Voters Network.

“Being able to run a business, grow profits, and
expand a company is not synonymous with being able to run a complex federal
government,” Hayes wrote in his newest piece for the IVN website.

Clearly, a president must be able to work with Congress
and the generals and a bureaucracy that works on a dizzying array of matters.
Unlike in the dictatorial business world, a president cannot force the House
and Senate to take action or bark out orders to the military brass or tell the
Supreme Court how to rule.

In the corporate world, Trump and Fiorina have been known
for their “my way or the highway” approach. That mindset could be a disaster in
the Oval Office, especially when dealing with the sharply divided factions of
the current Congress.

But I would go one step further. First, a voter has to
get past the idea that Trump and Fiorina were not very successful in the
business world.

Fiorina was an extremely controversial figure as
Hewlett-Packard CEO and many in the business world labeled her an utter failure
when she was forced out. Trump famously endured bankruptcies with four of his
companies and his success has been limited almost entirely to building hotels.

So, those resumes are not particularly impressive and
they certainly don’t reflect the skills needed to become commander-in-chief in
a dangerous world or the chief solver of problems at home where a complex set
of issues awaits the next president.
The Democrats have two frontrunners, one that is considered untrustworthy and one that is unelectable. But the GOP’s problem is that the least qualified candidates have risen to the top.

Hayes points out that Fiorina’s widely acclaimed debate
performance last week included several missteps on military matters. Others
have estimated that her agenda for the Pentagon would cost $500 billion.

“And yet, she managed to one up Donald Trump, whose only
policy stance on Russia is that he would ‘get along great with Vladimir Putin,’”
Hayes wrote. “What the American people are supposed to take away from that
statement, no one knows, but it’s time to recognize that being able to
negotiate is not a foreign policy stance.

“When pushed on the issue and asked for an answer to the
original question beyond simply ‘reaching out,’ Trump reiterated his ‘record’
of getting along great with people all over the world, apparently indicating
his ability to negotiate deals with foreign leaders in the most complex global
political climate this world has ever known — without any experience.

“Amazingly, Trump has somehow made it this far without
taking a policy stance on almost any issue.”

Hayes concludes with a bold assertion:

“Here is the bottom line: Donald Trump and Carly Fiorina
are playing to the lowest of low information voters. Candidates who can get by
sounding aggressive or playing a persona.

“This (election) cycle, the persona du jour is the ‘Washington
Outsider.’ The only problem with this persona is when it coincides with actual
ignorance to the state of world affairs, it means the candidate it woefully
unqualified to hold the highest office in the United States.”

 

 

 

Recent Posts: