Most jobs require some mention of experience in order to secure a position. This is especially true for important vocations, like ones in politics. I sure hope an elected official has some sort of experience working with people, especially those with dissenting ideas, and is able to compromise. No political position is as alluring as being the president of the United States of America. This is evidenced by all of the countless individuals who have threatened presidential bids, had fans attempt to encourage a campaign and by those who actually do end up running for the presidency.
This current election has given us a myriad of interesting candidates. Whether or not one agrees with a particular candidate’s stances, one must admit that this election cycle is pretty unconventional and exciting for odd reasons. The most polarizing candidate is actually the most inexperienced one, one without any political experience whatsoever. His supporters argue that his success in business is enough to warrant him being taken as a serious presidential option, although his critics disagree.
But should a candidate have prior political experience before becoming commander-in-chief? Why not consider someone who can get enough votes and attention and get the job done despite being an “outsider?” I’m not saying Trump is the candidate I support, but if a more rational and less-bigoted “outsider” ran, his or her validity shouldn’t be called into question. As long as one is aware of his or her duties and how to execute them appropriately, then there should be no issue. Another thing that should be considered is that many presidents gained life experience doing things other than politics,and it’s the lessons they learned doing those others things that they applied to their successful political careers.
Arguments have been made throughout history as to what should qualify one for the presidency. Being a politician, much like having military experience, having a college education; maybe even a doctorate, being a white male, being religious, are all technically unnecessary for becoming president. At least in terms of it not barring one from campaigning. Leave it up to the voters to see who they feel comfortable with electing and having reign over them.
Astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson said it best: “What profession do all of these senators and congressmen have? Law, law, law, law, businessman, law, law, law…Where are the scientists? Where are the engineers? Where’s the rest of life?”
What he alludes to is the fact that candidates should be of one mold. Outsider candidates should be encouraged. Different professions yield different perspectives: leaders in sciences can offer valuable insight as well as typical political leaders. Candidates from different disciplines can offer more than a humanistic lens, which is what political science views through. Not to mention, candidates from atypical backgrounds may influence policy that typically gets ignored.
