One thing I never understood about checking the boxes. You end up setting people up for failure when the lack the knowledge or leadership capabilities to begin with. I do believe diversity of thought and background make for a stronger organization, but lowering standards (like the LA mayor is suggesting for the police force) or hiring/electing someone that is totally incompetent. Just dumb.
In the 1990's a lot of Police Departments in NJ started to require a 4 year college degree prior to getting the job. Studies show that officers with the 4 year degree had less civilian complaints lodged against them, lower incidents of arrests requiring use of force, less use of deadly force, and higher productivity.
Exactly but she should have never been nominated, much less elected in the first place. Need to stop promoting crappy candidates and overlooking their deficiencies because they check a box.
She wasn't appointed. She was elected. Many horrible candidates get elected. And when they prove themselves to not be worthy, they should be kicked out. It is not like Lori Lightfoot had some lightweight credentials. She went to the University of Chicago Law School. It is one of the best law schools in the country. She was an Assistant US Federal Prosecutor, She worked in private practice. You are making it out like she didn't have the resume to become mayor. She certainly did. She just wasn't a good mayor.
Just because she’s an attorney doesn’t mean she has the leadership qualities and skill set to be a mayor.
You made it sound like she was clearly deficient for the job. What were her deficiencies that were so obvious that would outweigh her credentials? If you graduated from a top tier law school, certainly you are qualified to be a mayor. Now, she wasn't good at the job and that happens and is a different story. There are plenty of smart well educated people that are not good at being policiticans or being a mayor or Senator or Congressman. And you never know how a person will be at their job until they do it.
You’re equating being an attorney from a good school with having the skill sets to be a good mayor. Just because your lawyer, does that mean you have the pre-requisite leadership skills, background to manage a budget and different constituents? Would that mean an astrophysicist would make a great mayor?
Once again, it’s not about the job that you’re currently doing, but rather the skills you need to operate successfully in that role. I really don’t know much about Truman’s background, but maybe he was a good businessman that had the ability to get things done and bring consensus. It wasn’t about the color of his skin or sexual orientation, which somehow has become more important than ability.
There is a reason why so many attorneys get into politics and government. Law is intertwined with government. Thus, attorneys are deemed to be qualified just by being attorneys. Now, that doesn't mean they will be good at it. Just means they certainly have the qualifications. Those are two different things.
That opinion coming from an attorney...that's precious. Having a law degree doesn't mean your anymore qualified than a Marketing MBA, Surgeon or Architect. It just means you went to college.
I don't know, but I saw nothing in her actions that made me think she was anywhere qualified.
If you can't see the natural relationships between lawyers and government/politicians, I don't know what to tell you. When over half of Congress are attorneys and half of the Presidents have been attorneys, it is kind of hard to argue that relationship. Go back to our Founding Fathers when 25 of the 55 signers of the Declaration of Independence were lawyers and 32 of the 55 framers of the Constitution were lawyers.
Maybe that explains the 12% approval rating of Congress. Maybe it's more like lawyers who aren't very good, get into politics.
Dead on, top 1/3 of the class of lawyers cannot think logically, 2nd third make the best lawyers and last 1/3 make the most money. Guess which 1/3 represents the politicians.
