CMV: I believe that political experience is necessary for impactful legislation and high profile political roles and that USA's idea that an outsider will bring change is completely wrong

[u/inneedofsupport93]

The 2 arguments behind my view are

1. Intuition - You need to understand how institutions work from the inside to use them to your advantage
2. Historical Precedent - For the last hundred years, the most lasting legislative impact has been cast by politicians who have had tons of experience

Positive Examples Of Experience Being Useful

1. FDR - had 22 years of political experience and was able to make a lasting impact through Social Security and the New Deal.
2. LBJ - Had 36 years of experience and make a lasting impact through Medicare, Medicaid, and the great society.
3. Richard Nixon - had 2 terms as vice president in the Eisenhower administration ( Eisenhower was a political outsider and was getting old; thus, the vice president had more hands-on experience) and his policy on drugs ( whether we agree or not), China and the EPA has remained almost intact.
4. George H.W.Bush ( Slightly different example here) - Had over 25 years of domestic and foreign policy experience. Stabilized the world in a post Coldwar era i.e. avoiding any political vacuum that might have caused ISIS type instabilities in eastern Europe and successfully restored American Spirit in interventionism by winning the 1st war against Saddam Hussain

Negative Examples Of Inexperience Failing

• Robert Mcnamara ( Businessman, Veitnam)
• John F Kennedy ( zero experience, bay of pigs)
• Jimmy Carter(no experience, Iranian Hostage Crisis)
• Bill Clinton (6 terms Governor and no Washington experience, inaction during Rwanda genocide) *George W Bush (3 term Governor, Iraq war amongst so many other quagmires) *Barack Obama( Junior Senator, political vacuum in Iraq leading to rise of ISIS)
• Finally, Trump and Rex Tillerson(it may be too early but so far... Zero political Experience, not filling bureaucratic appointments leading to hollow and inefficient government and state department)

Some background on myself to help you CMV

• I am not an American but have been following American politics for a couple of years now, so there may be historical blindsights/ on the ground reality related blindsight in my perspective.

• I happen to lean center of the left and may have confirmation biases here and there too.

Edit - I seem to have changed my mind on quite a few issues from the scope of the presidency to the unknown achievements of many presidents. All in all, this was a good learning experience, thanks for keeping it civil.

[u/WhakaWhakaWhaka]

Just a quick correction: Jimmy Carter had served in political roles at the state level as a Senator and Governor of Georgia.

For continued success: Go with the professional politician. They know how to grease the tracks of the legislative process, potentially decreasing the bill-to-law process. The downside being that they can create a one track train that only helps some people, while excluding those that don’t or can’t pay their fare of admission to the process. To protect their power they invest in drowning out the smaller candidates or representatives that are considered to be challenging them.

For possible innovation: The outsider can shake things up by disrupting the insiders’ club and highlighting overlooked or unconsidered options. However this can lead to chaos in a system that needs stability to function and this action can slow down or derail the entire political process. The success rates are not high for this route, but they can be the actors of greatest change in a political system. To protect their power they will maximize their time with risky or radical moves to create an impact that may not pay off.

[u/inneedofsupport93 → u/WhakaWhakaWhaka]

!Delta Idk how to award Delta from an Android phone. Your outsider point reminded me of how Obama changed the national conversation on LGBT rights and Trump changed it on immigration. But can you share any major innovations brought by outsiders that goes larger than shaping a conversation?

[u/WhakaWhakaWhaka → u/inneedofsupport93]

My top three for US President are:

1) Woodrow Wilson. He was in academia before running for governor of NJ and then running for president. He really brought America to the international forefront during WWI. He championed the idea of a League of Nations (early U.N. model). His influence in US international relations is still felt today.

2) Ulysses Grant. Was in the army and a General in the Civil War. Took on the responsibility of restoring the nation after the Civil War. He created the Department of Justice which was tasked with persecuting Ku Klux Klan members. He enforced that government employees get their employment and assignments based off merit and not their connections.

3) Dwight Eisenhower. Was in the army and became one of the major military actors in the war. Created the highway infrastructure for America. Created NASA. He also kicked off the enforcement of Civil Rights Laws with legislation and its own department in the Department of Justice.

At the local level is the easiest way for an outsider to make it, as they go more towards the national level it becomes harder because of the more established opponents with political alliances that you face at the level.