Sure. (Though he isn’t U.S. born) Or Bill Gates.
(But) I’m most interested in considering the probability of people whose primary draw as a candidate is fame they gained through something like the entertainment industry, for example. Because the skill set necessary to succeed seems to have little to do with being an effective POTUS.
Trump is still a “business man”, so Lumifer is right that it’s reasonable to assume he’s at least a competent manager. The same could be said of Musk or Gates.
Neither was Obama.
Well, timeframe & circumstances are important to note here.
In, say...2012, I think a 1% probability of Donald Trump being POTUS (elect) in Nov 2016 would have seemed far too high to most.
By Nov 1 of 2016, 20% seemed more reasonable.
The probability spikes dramatically after the candidate wins their party’s nomination.
Ha. No.
I got that part.
The jokes, bro. I didn’t get the jokes. You’re typically kinda funny.
I guess probability says you’re bound to miss the mark occasionally.
I don’t get it.
How about Tom Hanks? Oprah? Mark Zuckerberg? George Clooney?
And I go through lots of apples if I’m still hungry (or I just have a not-hungry-but-want-to-eat mood going) after I’m done with dinner and it works for me in the same way people are describing below.
I think you got hung up on the name Beyonce. Don’t.
Maybe experts-at-looking-in-the-rearview-mirror but those don’t seem to be terribly useful.
Agreed. :)
Second point: the electorate does not care about “actual credentials” and has not been caring for many decades by now. I’m not sure what credentials would those be, anyway.
Well, you suggested having manager skills...
But we seem to agree that skills relevant to doing the job of POTUS aren’t necessarily of primary importance in regard to being elected. Is this an accurate statement of your view?
Third point: social media has NOT demonstrated its ability to elect a president. Trump was not elected on the strength of his social media game.
It seems to be fairly non-controversial that Trump employed social media effectively and this helped him win… Can you elaborate on what you mean?
Being a celebrity is useful, but it’s about as useful as, say, being tall.
This seems obviously false for lots of reasons and I assume you’re kidding.
Citation needed. I do not think this is the case with Trump.
Admittedly tough to quantify.
these were not experts and their words are not credible.
Or, they were basing their predictions on outdated maps of the territory.
What would keep other celebs from doing that?
Can you explain, in your view, what Trump did to get a lot of attention that another huge celebrity could not do?
From my view, he seemed to get lots of headlines just for being a celebrity and running for POTUS simultaneously.
Not unlike OJ made headlines for being a celeb and being on trial for murder at the same time.
Thank you for the fair warning.
The question is more about celebrity and social media having the ability to get people elected regardless of that person’s actual credentials to be the CEO of America.
You seem to be getting hung up on the particular names of the celebrities I am mentioning. Why?
Ronald Reagan was a shitty actor before his gov’t career; Arnold Schwarzenegger was the same; Jesse Ventura was a wrestler/actor.
Trump seems to me to be more a result of the phenomenon whereby a celebrity uses their profile and name recognition as the overwhelming means for getting elected *, rather than displaying any “managerial competencies”.
In the last two decades, the internet + millennials, yada, yada. Therefore, I’m asking about how much this phenomenon may have been accelerated...to the point where a pure mega celeb could win a November popularity/beauty contest in which there is no requisite IQ/current events awareness test given at the polls.
Again, we just elected Trump in the U.S. when such a thing had been considered virtually impossible according to most credible experts.
You’re saying Trump’s win was possible where other celebs’ wins are not because manager skills.
And also because he wears suits, I presume?
Edit - * Along with a two party system that makes a roughly even split of the vote likely.
LOL
Like at the correspondents dinner where Obama, et al mocked Trump’s chops for/chances of being president?
Or all through out the 18 months leading up to last Nov?
How’d that work out for the LOLers?
Competent Manager
Hm. What sort of skills do you think this involves? Confidence? The ability to motivate & communicate ideas clearly?
KIM KARDASHIAN FOR PRESIDENT!!!
I don’t think this is as likely as somebody like Beyonce, Ellen, Justin Timberlake—someone who has displayed intelligence and charisma.
It’s about the a) simplicity of voting, b1) the power of name recognition and b2) social media, c) the two party system that ensures a relatively close contest, and d) tribalism that kills minds and makes Evangelicals vote for a guy who brags about grabbing women by their genitals at 81%
I don’t think he has the broad popularity to win.
Maybe Ellen Degeneres?
Given that you are not referencing any media article
It’s Pew’s data, if I recall. It was widely cited after the election.
This was just one instance of many I recall where non-alt-right/NRx types were found to vote for Trump in significant numbers.
Could a mega celeb win the U.S. Presidency?
Say, Beyonce in 2024?
I’m thinking someone with a huge active social media following, universal name recognition, attractive and charismatic, significant financial resources, history of political activism, strategic demographic appeal, progressive politics as a backlash to whatever Trump gets done over the next 8 years...
Is the probability non-negligible? More so now that Trump won, right?
At the same time there’s a pretense in the media that Trump voters (who might be 100 as large in numbers) automatically belong to either of those categories.
This* seems obviously false. Do you have any evidence for this?
For instance, 81% of white Evangelicals voted for Trump. From my background in that community and many discussions with current members, I can tell you there are many reasons they voted for Trump...almost none of them overlap with anything I know of the neoreactionary or alt-right movements.
Edit - The idea there is a “pretense in the media seems as false as the claim itself. Outlets I watch/read often note the Trump constituency is diverse.
“Stupidity” is a...word that we apply to different conditions which may be caused by deep subconscious conditioning (e.g., religion).
Wow.
Looks like the ‘RECENT ON RATIONALITY BLOGS’ section on the sidebar is still broken.
Is this a difficult fix?
I was joking.