We need a Political Obstacle Course

Hossenfeffer

Diamond Member
Jul 16, 2000
7,462
1
0
Just had an epiphany...

With all the talk of debates, mudslinging, etc., is there any way to (in theory) increase the objective measurement(s) of a candidates potential?

Enter, the Political obstacle course.

Things I can imagine being part of it:

- Computer simulation/testing. Test on current events, logic tests, etc.
- Given a set of advisors, how well does the candidate comprehend the information, prioritize and delegate.
- Real-world situations, negotiations, debates. Have actors (feel free to hire me for it) portray world leaders, polititicians etc. See how well he/she can negotiate.
- Throw in a physical obstacle course just for the fun of it, given that there is at least a small perceived value in someone who has a strong physical presence.

One idealistic benefit this "could" hold would be allowing some folks that aren't neccessarily the richest folks being able to successfully campaign.

Much less empahsis put on money needed for advertising. No more attack ads. The scores (Political Aptitude Standardized Tests) would be publically posted. Then they could say "It's all in the PAST" (*groan*) ;)

Any other "events" we could throw in there?

(one of these days, I'll actually have a posting style that generates attention-whore-satisfying traffic)
 

Martin

Lifer
Jan 15, 2000
29,178
1
81
Originally posted by: Hossenfeffer
And here I thought I was being brilliant :)

Its too brilliant for people here to comprehend, that's why they're not replying ;)
 

Kibbo

Platinum Member
Jul 13, 2004
2,847
0
0
Wouldn't work. Just as with computer benchmarks, real-wold tests are always different from mock-ups.

These tests, if they gained any kind of reputation for non-partisanship, would soon become the primary method used by independents for selection. This would distort the selection from the "best" candidate for the job. Now, there are plenty of distortions inherent in the system already, but you can't prove that this distortion would be better. And many of the criteria would have to be subjectively rated by some expert, so what do you do about the French judge?

Nice idea, but ultimately impractical.