Do you honestly believe that the American electorate could/would elect a president that was more concerned with 'his legacy' than 'the good of the country'?

we did, multiple times. I honestly believe americans are dumb enough to elect someone mostly concerned with her legacy this time around

Of course they would! People, as a whole, are as stupid as creek rock, so what’s to stop them???

@ARE_you_kidding_me You’re talking about Carly Fiorina, right??

I don’t know if you’re referring to a specific incident here, but my first reaction is that I tend not to think of politicians talking about their legacy until after they have been in office for some time. Why talk about it in a campaign, unless it is a potential re-election? And in the latter case, voters already have a public record to refer to, to inform their choice.

I think that talking about one’s legacy in a campaign must be a matter of either selfishness (I want to seek office to build a legacy for myself – vote for me so my legacy will be even more awesome) or pride (look at the legacy I’ve built so far on my excellent skills and hard work – vote for me so that I can apply these skills and hard work for you).

As such, it’s not terribly useful from the voter’s point of view. Would I refuse to vote for someone who touted a great legacy while campaigning? Of course not – I would ignore it as self-promotion, and instead investigate their platform and/or their prior voting record.

Since a President’s legacy is measured by his or her performance in office, I have no problem with a big ego reined into the public good. Concern for one’s legacy should not necessarily be regarded as a negative. After all, if your driving ambition is to have statues of your likeness erected nationwide, it’s likely that you will need to perform exceptionally in order to achieve it. It would be naive to believe the menagerie of characters lusting after the big job to be driven solely by idealism.

And the American electorate could/would elect a donut President after proper manipulation.

Is trump still the conservative frontrunner?

Politicians are rarely more concerned for their country than they are for their own legacy. I’d be surprised if there even was one in the presidential race.

I don’t understand the question. Are you saying people will vote for a candidate who says they want to be President to boost their own legacy? Who says that? I don’t get it. I can imagine them saying their goal
is to be remembered for affecting or creating a certain change for the country, is that what you mean?

Too vague for me to answer either.

A president driven more by personal aggrandizement than by a belief they could lead the country effectively.

A candidate that had their ‘eyes on the prize’ more than an effective plan to govern, @JLeslie & @janbb?

A candidate so focused on winning that the first year or two of their first term could be eaten up by chaos.

Honestly, I think that applies to a number of candidates still in the race.

If you mean a candidate that says he would fundamentally change the country, if you mean a candidate that says his election will be seen as the moment the earth began to heal and the oceans began to recede, then yes the voters are dumb enough to elect that person.

@ibstubro What candidate admits that? Are there any particular candidates in the race that you perceive as just wanting the prize? I think most people who run for President think they can make a real difference. That they would do a great job.

Legacy is something that others describe (or ascribe) to you. You cannot make your own legacy. legacy is only something that a dozen years or more – the passage of time – can develop.

Aha – I think if you said more driven by ego or self-aggrandizement it would have been clearer to me because of what @elbanditoroso identifies about legacy.

Now to answer the question, I honestly don’t know why we will elect whom we elect seeing how far some ludicrous candidates have gotten.

@kritiper no, but I’m not even going to pretend you don’t know who I’m talking about

@ARE_you_kidding_me I knew…just couldn’t help myself.

Yeah, during her reign at HP she almost wrecked the company.
Now she uses that campaign and the republican propaganda machine to spin this utter failure into making her some sort of business savvy business woman.
Even if she does not win the election, the propaganda campaign will still have worked, at least in the eyes of the neonazi-party voters.

So… for those of us who didn’t hear what she said, what was the quote about her legacy? I’m still trying to figure out what the context could be.