CEOs as President

[Goredho 17341]

We have lots of conversations about Trump, his assumed narcissistic personality disorder and other attributes that make for a President that most here loathe.

Beyond Trump, however, I wonder if CEOs in general are poor candidates to be good Presidents.  I've spent most of my professional life working at start ups, where the "maverick" CEO is glorified.  They can show a lot of the same characteristics of Trump -- despotic rule over their domain, a lack of empathy for individuals, boorish behavior, projecting infallibility at all times, bending the truth as necessary and pitting people against each other to get things done.  Outside of my personal experiences, there is strong evidence that ceos often are simply functional sociopaths. These characteristics, while personally questionable, tend to help them best serve the investor's interests.

In national politics, however, there has traditionally been the need for tact, diplomacy and consensus building.  You could not simply strong-arm your way to the exclusion of all else or one of two things would happen -- checks and balances would kick in to limit your power or you/your party would get voted out.  The best leaders (imo) have been strong but humble, deep thinkers capable of nuance and possessed with a profound respect for the gravity of their responsibility.  Trump and most other CEOs I've known really had none of these characteristics.  The primary attribute that lets them be successful, always for a somewhat limited time, seems to be a lack of empathy that allows them to maintain a positive self-perception while getting what they want through abject assholery.

Now, we don't know yet if a backlash will kick in for Trump until after the fall elections.  And you would also have to say Trump has succeeded at least partially in bending American politics to his will.  His core base would probably characterize this as "political success".  But it has completely alienated the middle and left and is making lots of enemies and no new allies.  So I don't see his tenure to date as any sort of a "political success", I see it simply as an asshole getting his way for a time as more-and-more people awaken to the damage he is doing to our country.

At any rate, given all the above, should we look to the ranks of CEOs for Presidential candidates?  Are there any CEOs that you think would make an excellent president?

[Js1 85085]

If that CEO also has political experience, sure. CEO to the White House, no thanks.

Mitt Romney was a CEO.  Mitt Romney would not have been a massive failure in terms of governing because he also had experience governing.

Edited June 28, 2018 by Js1

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Mitt Romney would have been an excellent president.

[Goredho 17341]

That's a fair point, if you simply go from CEO to President, there is a tremendous amount of on-the-job training that one would undergo that is not ideal.

[Lagunamadre 1975]

8 minutes ago, Goredho said:

We have lots of conversations about Trump, his assumed narcissistic personality disorder and other attributes that make for a President that most here loathe.

Beyond Trump, however, I wonder if CEOs in general are poor candidates to be good Presidents.  I've spent most of my professional life working at start ups, where the "maverick" CEO is glorified.  They can show a lot of the same characteristics of Trump -- despotic rule over their domain, a lack of empathy for individuals, boorish behavior, projecting infallibility at all times, bending the truth as necessary and pitting people against each other to get things done.  Outside of my personal experiences, there is strong evidence that ceos often are simply functional sociopaths. These characteristics, while personally questionable, tend to help them best serve the investor's interests.

In national politics, however, there has traditionally been the need for tact, diplomacy and consensus building.  You could not simply strong-arm your way to the exclusion of all else or one of two things would happen -- checks and balances would kick in to limit your power or you/your party would get voted out.  The best leaders (imo) have been strong but humble, deep thinkers capable of nuance and possessed with a profound respect for the gravity of their responsibility.  Trump and most other CEOs I've known really had none of these characteristics.  The primary attribute that lets them be successful, always for a somewhat limited time, seems to be a lack of empathy that allows them to maintain a positive self-perception while getting what they want through abject assholery.

Now, we don't know yet if a backlash will kick in for Trump until after the fall elections.  And you would also have to say Trump has succeeded at least partially in bending American politics to his will.  His core base would probably characterize this as "political success".  But it has completely alienated the middle and left and is making lots of enemies and no new allies.  So I don't see his tenure to date as any sort of a "political success", I see it simply as an asshole getting his way for a time as more-and-more people awaken to the damage he is doing to our country.

At any rate, given all the above, should we look to the ranks of CEOs for Presidential candidates?  Are there any CEOs that you think would make an excellent president?

Depends on the CEO. Travis Kalanick, no. Jamie Dimon, yes. CEO's that earn it, are competent. CEO's like Trump who inherit their titles from their fathers, are probably not worth a shit.  

[Thermos H. Christ 478]

22 minutes ago, Goredho said:

That's a fair point, if you simply go from CEO to President, there is a tremendous amount of on-the-job training that one would undergo that is not ideal.

And there's already going to be more on-the-job learning than one would probably like, just because basically nobody has experience being the President. I'm sure there's a lot of concepts that carry over from being the governor of a state but it's most definitely not the same job. Pretty much everyone who's ever been in a position to comment, including Trump I believe, has said that it's harder than they figured it would be.

Edited June 28, 2018 by Thermos H. Christ

[27-25 2040]

A CEO of a publicly traded company may have a shot.  Those types of positions require a certain level of political acuity in dealing with a large number of investors who sometimes want different things from the person at the top.

The head of a family company with effectively no shareholders is a completely different type of animal.  There are essentially no shareholders, at least not any outside of the family.  The CEO of that entity can rule as a tyrant with little danger of being deposed.  Should it be a surprise that such an individual, when transitioning to public office, might attempt to apply the same conditions to their new role?

[bad_teammate 13132]

As someone who thinks CEOs in general are fit for little but guillotines, it is honestly a case-by-case. The CEO of my current firm would be a fucking nightmare, but the CEO of the first energy firm I worked for would've been amazing (RIP).

[SimonBolivar 10910]

32 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Mitt Romney would have been an excellent president.

I agree with this. Comparing the candidates of 2012 with the candidates of 2016 is pretty sad.

[Goredho 17341]

8 minutes ago, 27-25 said:

A CEO of a publicly traded company may have a shot.  Those types of positions require a certain level of political acuity in dealing with a large number of investors who sometimes want different things from the person at the top.

 The head of a family company with effectively no shareholders is a completely different type of animal.  There are essentially no shareholders, at least not any outside of the family.  The CEO of that entity can rule as a tyrant with little danger of being deposed.  Should it be a surprise that such an individual, when transitioning to public office, might attempt to apply the same conditions to their new role?

I agree.  I mean, their entire past history as a CEO would tell them "Take control, push people around, get things done."

[atomheartbevo 89396]

Do they prefer burned steaks covered in ketchup? Do they have to write a book telling everybody they are good at deals?

Those are two good red flags right there.

[bad_teammate 13132]

7 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

I agree with this. Comparing the candidates of 2012 with the candidates of 2016 is pretty sad.

From Romney/Obama to Trump/Clinton fuuuuck this stupid country.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

There are always exceptions but I think CEO’s are a bad fit for President because they look at their responsibilities through a business lens.

My ideal type President is a philosopher warrior statesman type like an H.R. McMaster, Robert Mueller, Sally Yates, or Elizabeth Warren.

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

There are always exceptions but I think CEO’s are a bad fit for President because they look at their responsibilities through a business lens.

My ideal type President is a philosopher warrior statesman type like an H.R. McMaster, Robert Mueller, Sally Yates, or Elizabeth Warren.

Yates 2020. All in for the first PILF. 

[F250 28674]

Just dropping in to point out that Trump was never a real CEO.