Take me to your leader...

Candidate A: Franklin D. Roosevelt

Candidate B: Winston Churchill

Candidate C: Adolf Hitler

Didn't Hitler have a mistress, Eva Braun? Or was that his wife?

Oh, and it would have been a more fair selection (although I got the point) if Candidate C said "Candidate C is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer, hasn't had any illicit affairs, believes in Eugenics, and wants to purge the world of anyone different from him."

very nice, jefff. Jody, I think the point was that the bit about eugenics and purging wasn't clear until much later and it behooves one to look more deeply at candidates than the press initially offers.

I cannot take credit for the wording of the question - it was lifted shamelessly and verbatim from a bottomless forward. Statements as to any of the individuals' declared philosophies appear absent.

And otherwise their policies are identical? In that case, probably A.

It's a nicely turned wry joke, but as a survey I don't think it really works.

So this is what, a popularity contest? Do any of them have or lack relevant qualifications? BAD FERRET!

Ah. Now I see. Clever, though I have to agree it doesn't quite work as a survey.

I think it's a great survey, and y'all are just feeling bad because you picked Hitler. :) I picked candidate B because I liked the sleeping until noon part. If he's asleep, he can't be wreaking too much havoc...

Some insight into the person's views on various topics would be nice, but if the objective is to see who gets picked based on these merits alone, I'd probably have to say C.

Jody: Hitler and Eva Braun never consummated their relationship. They were boyfriend and girlfriend with no hanky-panky. They also did get married the day of their deaths.

I'm assuming "and they are otherwise identical" and consequently picking C 'cuz he's least often inebriated. Given other assumptions I might pick other choices.

Eek!

Adolf Hitler was an on-again off-again vegetarian. Mostly off-again. He wrote propaganda for animal rights, but he was also quite fond of sausage...

Can't blame someone for liking sausage.

"It can happen to anyone -- sausage is very seductive." --Filbert, "Rocko's Modern Life"

um, where do they stand on the issues I care about?

Oh, I see. you got me!

Other... but I chose A because if I chose C, I'd be getting us into the same predicament that we're already in.

Can we have some "in between" please..I just wouldn't vote. That also means I couldn't dog about what happens, though.

What's a ward heeler?

I couldn't decide between A and B. Taking astrology seriously and having been kicked out of office for good reason are both negatives for me, but you don't say that A takes it seriously or that there was a good reason for kicking B out, and anyway I'd rather have those than a warlord any day. Nothing wrong with drugs, booze, or mistresses (or vegetarianism) in my book, though.

Oh, I see, it's a reference to corruption. Call me J. Edgar Hoover...

have to admit i had seen this in my email already!!!

Presenting the candiates like that is very misleading, as it leaves out the most important factor: their policies. Of course, that's exactly the point you're making, but it's not a real-life situation. You can make anyone look good in this kind of comparison simply by picking the right factors.

None of the Above

I would actually go with A or C. I couldn't care less whether a leader smokes or not and if HAD mistressess, that doesn't mean he will continue. As a vegetarian myself, I think it would be great to have more world leaders who are not meat eaters. But none of these characteristics tell much about the candidtes knowledge of the political system and his/her ability to lead, which I feel form a
more compelling basis for a vote.

what's ward heelers

What the hell is a ward heeler?

Allright already! A ward heeler is an Americanism that literally means someone who runs [heels] errands etc for the people in power [in the wards, i.e. the local voting districts].

It means a political sycophant - a suck-up, a toady. It implies someone who will "do" for those with power, without worrying about the issue or parties involved.

Whew! Now we're all much better prepared for that pop quiz later...

****

As to the policies and leadership abilities of the three revealed "candidates". Quite frankly, they were all liberal democrats (within the political millieu of their cultures anyway) with strong socialist and nationalist tendencies. All were charismatic, all were strong leaders, with an ability to mobilize the government and the countries they ran to accomplish tremendous things. All had vision (although I think everyone here would agree that Candidate C's vision was a dark and corrupt one).

I think that perhaps the original bottomless forward doesn't mention anything about policy because the point is to demonstrate how big a disconnect there can be between the public perception and the internal realization of morality in the people we pick as our leaders.

I could never vote for a vegetarian.

whee... I am happy to have picked Winston Churchill

C

definitely

Boy, am I feeling good I didn't pick any -- seemed to me they all had something wrong with them!

Jefff: that was good and cute, but does it mean the survey has to die?

I would bring Socrates back and make him leader! None of the above.

fy: luckily for you, all three of the candidates are as dead as Socrates.

D: Me