Presidential Simulations: A Better Basis for Choosing Our Leaders

[babylonsister]

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/6899

Presidential Simulations: A Better Basis for Choosing Our Leaders
by Andrew Bard Schmookler | Apr 18 2007 - 2:09pm


snip//

Wouldn’t it be good if –before we hire someone to guide our country through these dangerous times—we citizens could get a meaningful look at how the candidates perform as president? As is demonstrated so powerfully by the film Thirteen Days (about the Cuban Missile Crisis), the fate of our civilization can depend on a president’s ability to navigate strategically through the perils of the unknown.

At this very moment, the United States is paying an enormous price for the defects (in terms of competence as well as of morality) in the decision-making process of our current president.

So wouldn’t it be good if we could see how well those running for the presidency can ask the necessary questions of the appropriate people, probe to get the relevant information, and make good decisions?

Well, we can. It’s time for us to institute a new tradition in our presidential campaigns: along with the debates, we should institute televised presidential simulations.

There have been televised simulations before. In the 1980s, ABC television teamed up with a major foreign-policy think tank to conduct simulations in which former high government officials in the national security field participated.

In such simulations, the participants are delivered news of some emerging crisis in the world. The group then seeks to learn as much as possible about the situation and to decide how to respond. News continues to come in, at intervals during the course of the simulation, and how the group responds also influences how the crisis unfolds.

more...

[yayden]

1. Not good TV

Who wants to watch Bush stare back at them for twenty minutes like someone just kicked him in the back of the head?

Jokes aside, it would actually be pretty interesting. If enough people watched the show, it could skew elections. Sure, you can market your candidate as well as you want to, but to watch him flounder about on live television would certainly dampen enthusiasm. On the other hand, candidates that don't get much ad space could see a boost if they performed well.

[babylonsister]

2. I'd be interested in the ones who performed well. And I'd say

welcome to DU, but see you've been here longer than I have. Person of few words?!:) Welcome anyway!

[yurbud]

3. This would be fascinating. Have a camera on them the whole time too

[yurbud]

4. Problem is often not their judgment, but who they will serve once in office

Someone could be very competent and bought.

Nixon was a smart guy after all as was Papa Bush.

[yurbud]

5. I could see a righty barking orders like Guiliani and fooling the tards just the way

Bush did after 9/11. A lot of people wouldn't look at the results just the swagger during the process.

[bemildred]

6. How about having a panel of "retired judges" pick the President?

But seriously, shouldn't we try honest elections first? Maybe getting rid of the electoral college, and just have honest elections by popular vote?

[yurbud]

7. or even better, the supreme court. They'd do a great job.

[bemildred]

8. LOL. Yes. I forgot them. Great job they did. nt