Candidates in the primaries argue about whether experience or leadership for change is more important for a president. What I learned when I spoke at Google headquarters in Mountain View, California last month is that the young professionals there recognize that profound social change is already taking place. They want leaders at work and in Washington who understand the evolving world and m ake them collaborators in creating a better future. Experience without foresight and purpose is a drag, not a value.
Starting in the 1970s, people like the Googlers have been growing up in a world that has shaped them differently from their parents who were raised in the 1950s and 1960s. Then, most families were headed by a sole male wage earner. Today, typically both parents work, and more families are headed by a single woman than there are traditional families. Then, large national corporations promised lifetime employment. Now, global companies can't promise employment and employees are no longer loyal. Then, managers were almost all white men and the leadership model was paternalistic. Now, young professionals reject autocratic leaders and have worked for all types of bosses. Then, only researchers and financial companies used computers. Now, computers and the internet have transformed work, products, personal interactions, access to information, and knowledge creation. Then managers knew subordinates' jobs better than they did. Now, with the rapid advance of knowledge, subordinates often know more. What they seek in a leader is authenticity and a clear sense of purpose that is meaningful to them...so much for experience.
The result has been the emergence of a new social character which I call interactive in contrast to the bureaucratic social character that dominated the last century. When I described interactives, my listeners at Google recognized themselves. All the presidential candidates had visited Google, and almost all said they most liked Barack Obama. I asked why, and the answer was that he understood the challenges of the global economy. Obama emphasized America's need to provide opportunity, not by walling off the country, but by supporting education and innovation. They agreed with him that government had a role in funding scientific research, especially to protect the environment and gain energy independence. They saw Obama as inviting them to be collaborators, not followers. Their views reminded me of an American president, also from Illinois, whose limited government experience was a brief time in the state legislature and one term in Congress. As president, he grew in office and had the foresight that the growing industry of America needed government to support railroads and technical colleges. And he inspired people with a vision of realizing the promise of the Declaration of Independence. Of course, I was thinking of Abraham Lincoln. =======================================================
The Leaders We Need: And What Makes Us Follow By Dr. Michael Maccoby Harvard Business School Press, November 6, 2007
Posts: 84 | Location: Muskogee | Registered: June 15, 2007
I've voted in many Presidential elections and was fortunate to be on the Capital lawn when Bill Clinton was inaugurated for the 2nd time where I had the giggly pleasure of walking alongside JFK Jr. and his beautiful wife Caroline Kennedy.
You keep naysaying as Obama will push on and win the Democratic party nomination. It sounds as though you don't vote anymore. It sounds as though you have given up hope. That's a sad situation to be in.
Posts: 84 | Location: Muskogee | Registered: June 15, 2007
My mistake, thank you for correcting. She has been dead so long now I have forgotten how to spell her name. Caroline and Carolyn were both there just to clarify.
OBAMA '08
Posts: 84 | Location: Muskogee | Registered: June 15, 2007
Legal, if Obama becomes president, how many white people would be in his cabinet? When a white person is president in recent years, he makes a point of appointing a few Black people to important positions.
Do you know if his social circle is primarily Black? He will choose his cabinet from his qualified friends. I wouldn't mind some in the picture, but, not a majority. I say that only because the majority of people in this country are white.
Many of his voters will be Black and have never voted before. Perhaps the experience will encourage them to continue voting, even for a white candidate.
Posts: 239 | Location: Oklahoma | Registered: November 25, 2005
Originally posted by Rubi: Legal, if Obama becomes president, how many white people would be in his cabinet? When a white person is president in recent years, he makes a point of appointing a few Black people to important positions.
I am less concerned with someone's skin color than I am with their integrity and qualifications to do the job. Fortunately, the younger generations (those who have not been brainwashed into the tradition of inequality and racism) know the truth that we are all created equal. These young people are getting out and voting in this election and they are the primary constituents that make up Obama's voting base. They are black, white, hispanic, asian, etc.
I am also more concerned that the closed software of the Diebold voting machines be made open source so that we know our votes are being counted properly and that this Presidential race is fair and we get a President who is the true winner of the Democratic voting process.
Posts: 84 | Location: Muskogee | Registered: June 15, 2007
Thank you for your response. My questions are due to the magnitude of the event if a Black man were elected to our presidency. Skin color is of great concern to countless thousands of voters whether it should be or not. To deny that is denying a long-standing reality. Many Black people will be voting for Mr. Obama for NO reason other than his skin color; Just as many will not vote for him because of his skin color.
Democrats are being given the choice of a woman or a Black man. Many want neither, but, also cannot bring themselves to vote Republican. It's a quandary for some.
Posts: 239 | Location: Oklahoma | Registered: November 25, 2005
Maybe if we'd have not let the major networks run the campaign, we wouldn't have lost the two most qualified candidates, Joe Biden and Bill Richardson. And don't accuse me of being sexist, if Diane Feinstein were running, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
Posts: 742 | Location: Almost Okay | Registered: August 18, 2006
This is so exciting that everyone is talking politics! It is so relevant at this time and refreshing to see threads where people are having this discussion and thinking hard about their choices.
I couldn't resist weighing in...the Feinstein comment is just too tempting! Feinstein is beloved here in San Francisco but people are starting to become aware of the fact that she just is not standing up and speaking out the way she needs to be doing. First thing that caught my attention was a few years back when we had Kamala Harris running for DA supported by Feinstein. Harris ran openly on a platform stating that under no circumstances would she support the death penalty and would not prosecute with the goal of asking for the death penalty. Soon after Harris wins the election, with the support of Feinstein, a SF cop is killed in the line of duty. People are screaming for the death penalty and Harris holds her ground making the point that she had ran on the platform of no death penalty under any circumstances. Feinstein grandstands at the cops funeral making a wild statement to the press on the steps of the church that she would never have supported Harris had she known that Harris would not support the death penalty. ANYONE who was paying attention to the DA campaign knew what Harris stood for and against. This was no secret. There have been other things since this event but I won't bore you...
As for the ACTUAL Democratic candidates running, I really LOVE Bill Richardson. I believe he would be great for America. Unfortunately, he's just not popular. Everything he says makes sense. He's down to earth, reasonable, qualified and experienced. But he's not going to win the nomination because he doesn't have the star power. John Edwards has no depth. In the last election when he ran as VP with Kerry his Congressional voting record was so poor it became clear to me that the man didn't stand for anything. He doesn't want to vote on something that may come back to bite him so he just steers clear of anything controversial. He has a hard time getting detailed about anything and always has these superficial answers. I do like his passion about the "middle class" but he will not be a strong enough President for America and if he gets the nomination I will have to consider voting for another party (NOT REPUBLICAN). I will be thrilled to support Hillary if she gets the nomination but I am also voting for Barack Obama in the primaries. I realize, unfortunately, that the color of his skin is going to be an issue for many people, black and white, but he is still my top choice at this time. He's done such a super job keeping the democrats from killing each other during the debates. Truly, Hillary knows how to fight hard and dirty and she would do it if the atmosphere allowed but Barack is not playing her game and she can't play it alone. Look at the Republicans. They've gotten so nasty! They think that shows strength but it takes more strength to remain calm and dignified in the face of so much pressure which is what our President is under every single day of his term.
Good luck, no matter who you're voting for! I just hope the Republicans play fair and don't steal the election this time around!
Posts: 507 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: December 26, 2006
I agree with Rubi on reasons why some blacks will vote for Obama and why some whites will not vote for him....As far as having to choose between a black and a female for president being a hard choice for some people,it certainly wouldn't be for me....Women have been discriminated against far more than blacks, and I think it is a disgrace that this country has never had a female president....I agree with Gromit in that Edwards would be a good alternative to both Obama & Clinton, but I could sure vote for Clinton if need be and feel good about doing so.
Below is a post from another forum, that pretty well sums up my view of Obama's canadidacy.
================================================
I found this interesting. Obama's church Trinity Church of Christ: Please read and go to this church's website and read what is written there. It is very alarming. Barack Obama is a member of this church and is running for President of the U.S. If you look at the first page of their website, you will learn that this congregation has a non-negotiable commitment to Africa. No where is AMERICA even mentioned. Notice too, what color you will need to be if you should want to join Obama's church... B-L-A-C-K!!! Doesn't look like his choice of religion has improved much over his (former?) Muslim upbringing. Are you aware that Obama's middle name is Mohammed? Strip away his nice looks, the big smile and smooth talk and what do you get? Certainly a racist, as plainly defined by the stated position of his church! And possibly a covert worshiper of the Muslim faith, even today. This guy desires to rule over America while his loyalty is totally vested in a Black Africa!I cannot believe this has NOT been all over the TV and newspapers. This is why it is so important to pass this message along to all of our family & friends. To think that Obama has even the slightest&nb sp;chance in the run for the presidency , is really scary. Click on the link below: This is the web page for the church Barack Obama belongs to: http://www.tucc.org/about.htm
Posts: 119 | Location: Muskogee Ok | Registered: August 19, 2006
You could say similar things about all of the candidates. Some people are ONLY going to vote for Hilary because she is a woman. Some people are ONLY going to vote for Edwards because he is the only white, male, democratic candidate. He'll get a ton of votes from ignorant racists for that alone!
I went to the Trinity Church website and did not see anything "frightening". Which church in Muskogee has blacks and whites worshipping together? I've been to a few of the churches there and never saw any black people. The Mormon Church, Mitt Romney's religion of choice, believes black people are cursed by God and are from the line of Cain. Do you think that is frightening? You can't allow fear to guide your decisions. What do you think is going to happen? Barack Obama gets elected President and brings out all the brothers from the 'hood to run the White House? Or send ships over to Africa and brings over all of the starving refugees? What exactly are you afraid of? Oh, that perhaps Barack Obama will actually give hope to black people and they will stop killing one another in the projects and actually go to college in record numbers, get jobs that pay well and move into your neighborhood? Define your fears.
Discrimination against anyone for whatever reason is hurtful, period. It hurts to be looked down on because you are poor. It hurts to be looked down on because you are black. It hurts to be looked down on because you are a woman or a child or categorized in any other way that other people think is not good enough. Certainly, the Presidential race is not a contest to elect the most discriminated against candidate.
Posts: 507 | Location: San Francisco | Registered: December 26, 2006
Originally posted by gromit speaks: Helloooo... John Edwards.
Maybe if we'd have not let the major networks run the campaign, we wouldn't have lost the two most qualified candidates, Joe Biden and Bill Richardson. And don't accuse me of being sexist, if Diane Feinstein were running, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
The two most intelligent and qualified candidates are Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. I noticed from the first debates on that these two candidates where the only ones not dumming-down their speech so that the NASCAR American public could understand it. Ron Paul's use of terms like "Military Industrial Complex" pretty well blew over everyone's heads and kicked him even further out of the mainstream.
Bill Richardson is a complete moron. I was relieved to see that he is dropping out of the race today. His state is a complete piece of crap that is more-less an interstate for illegal aliens coming from Mexico and he does not even know how to count to ten. I am glad that I do not have to see him on TV anymore, counting on his fingers until he runs out of brainpower or digits. Now he can go back to his make-believe land where he created peace in the Middle East and is not the laughing stock of the big boys in Washington.