Cecilie1200
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #81
I have the impression that this is inevitable in our country. We're not picking a dictator, but a group of them that are locked in stalemate most of the time.Tongue in cheek, yes. For the most part, I am the future of the nation from my perspective, and we own that severally and as a bloc. It would defy the universe if the President alone impacted my life more than me and what I do with my time, etc.I go with Trump. I can't vote for him in the primary. Reason: I think it will be more exciting, and I'm confident that I/We could survive it.
Your big interest in choosing a President is excitement? You know this is the future of our nation, not entertainment, right?
You know... excitement isn't limited to entertainment value... right?
No, I don't. In this context, there is no good about "excitement". As far as I'm concerned, proper government administration should be boring and should allow me to ignore it for days, even weeks, at a time. It's like driving a semi for a living (which I used to do): if it's "exciting", you're doing it wrong.
Since I'm not one of these double-down on everything candidates, may I change my assertion from exciting to refreshing? It gets to the reason I'm excited, lets say.
Further, I'm 'excited' about new versions of middleware frameworks, even though that's all work not play.
ex·cit·ing
ikˈsīdiNG/
adjective
- causing great enthusiasm and eagerness.
Okay. I'll accept that. I'm personally still looking for a steady, consistent person who will do his job without feeling the need to hold a press conference every five minutes, or have so much involvement in my life that I have to constantly be aware of the federal government. There is something very wrong when individual citizens are that involved with the fed on a daily basis.