What character traits should the ideal politician have?

Worldwide people vote in their main leaders and are sorely disappointed not too long after. What character traits should they be looking for in a politican who will govern their country? How do you choose?
I would like to vote for someone honest. Have not found one so far yet that I can vote for!

 

The only worthy politician is the one who sees himself as a servant to the lowest in society while checking the power of the highest.

A president needs to remind himself that he is not King but instead holds the office of the aggregate of the will of the voters.

All elected officials need to remind themselves that they are first and foremost civilians; the head of a military should always be a civilian.

That being said, I'm not a Democrat or believe in welfare.

A good politician would remind his/her constitutents that they don't need the government and would work to end the hold that public authority (which is anything but public...) has over what the people should.

 

Someone with the inability to tell a lie would be good

 

The trouble with "people" is they live in an american idol society. the average person doesn't know what a politicians policies are, let alone understand thier implications, so they vote using the same method they use when voting on some trivial little TV show to determine which one has to eat the crocodile anus and which one gets the 5 star dinner.

people are generally cretins and sooner or later we are going to have to limit who is entitled to vote. because they idea that we are all "equal" is frankly insulting.

 

The Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised is a well validated psychological test intrument that rates a person's antisocial tendencies.

Besides criminals (the Ted Bundy's of the world) there are a few other groups that tend to score quite high on this instrument, including:

Police
Firemen
EMT's
CEO's

and...

Politicians

When one looks at what it takes to "succeed" in a capitalist society such as the US one will find that the sociopath is well equipped.

(That should bring out some defenders of the system!)

 

Wow, that's a tough question. I'm not sure I am interested in any "character traits" other than integrity, real world "work experience", and an ability to be humble to those he/she represents.

 

A politician should accept to not receive any salary (only have expenses paid) and live in a kind of reality show 24h/24 where any meeting or contact with others would be public, no secret meetings, no private life for the length of their "job" at the service of the public. If someone is unconfortable with that, he doesn't have to apply for the job..

 

Great so you don't want anyone who works for a living and supports a family. Only people who don't need money are allowed to be politicians? How do you expect someone to support a family with no salary?

 

Nobody would force anyone to be a politician. I said "only have expenses paid" so you know, accomodation, travels, clothing, etc. I'm talking about high level politcians, those who do this for a living, that would clean them since they wouldn't be allowed to make any profit, then you'd have people who want to serve the public.
As for lower politician jobs, those which don't need 24h work, then people can have their own job and do politics in the evening.
Again, nobody would be forced to work for the community as a politician, only those who really want.
Also the "no private life" is important in order to limit corruption.

One example of a bad politician the france's president, nicolas sarkozy has increased his salary 140%, more than double. And in his case the salary is pocket money, all goes into a saving account since all living expenses are also paid (and it is luxury living expenses)
This is insane because lots of people find it so normal..

 

The salary paid to politicians is the least of things to worry about. It is the one thing they actually earn and in many cases deserve.

I could not disagree with your suggestion more.

 

No salary means less laws made. New Hampshire's state house members are paid $200 a year, and it happens to be the freest state in the union.

A politician is a servant, and should act as such.

 

There is no correlation there nate.

 

Dang, that is a throw back to how the political history of the United States used to be.

When Lincoln was elected President, on the train to Washington DC he was surrounded by people that weren't even aware of who he was.

At this time, Washington DC was mostly swampland and the House was truly made up of a rabble-rousing bunch of community organizers, only to have their tempers cooled by the upper class Senate.

A public servant must relinquish his private life and ego in order to be an advocate for the disciplined aggregate will (distinct from the tyranny of majority that is democracy).

 

A common error of semantics made these days.

Public service != servitude

"People who have jobs in the service sector may be selling real estate, providing financial services, or working in a store or restaurant. Some work in industries with close ties to goods production, providing services such as transportation, wholesaling, retailing and insurance to manufacturers who must move their products from the factory gate to markets where they can be bought and sold."

We don't tend to think of realtors, sales people, waitresses, etc. as servants. Why do people want to denigrate public servants so?

I think more accurately that the term "public servant" reflects their obligation to protect the interests of the public, not to be treated like a servant.

 

People in the service industry are, to the best of my knowledge, treated as servants once we've bought whatever it is they are offering. Same thing with politicians, we buy all their feel-good campaign stuff and elect them and they're supposed to serve us in the same way. Service does = servitude, the key is it's voluntary and there's a "transaction" that takes place beforehand.

 

I have a preference, but technically an inoperable tumor isn't a character trait.

We need less politicians and more statesmen. There's a difference. Statesmen do what is right, politicians do what will get 'em re-elected. Integrity is in short supply in the seats of power.

 

serâ‹…viâ‹…tude
1. slavery or bondage of any kind: political or intellectual servitude.
2. compulsory service or labor as a punishment for criminals: penal servitude.
3. Law. a right possessed by one person to use another's property.

Service does not meet the definition of servitude. It is not slavery, compulsory, nor does it involve giving up property rights.

Your position may unfortunately reflect reality more than I would like to admit though. It often appears that politicians and high ranked government officials fit #1 in regards to their relationship with those power blocks that place them in office - in the process sacrificing independence of thought and sound judgment on the altar of dogma and/or dollars.

 

Didn't check the definition of servitude.. was thinking of servant. Servant does not equal servitude by definition however.

So politicians are still servants, is my point.

 

It looks like people want a person of integrity to lead them.
Are we such people?
Are we producing such people?

 

An interesting thought, although I think they should be paid a salary.