A senior HR manager at a top consulting firm once explained the recruitment process for leadership positions of such as CEOs. “We first have a series of formal interviews the goals are two fold evaluate the level of subject matter expertise and to understand the individual. Once the candidate clears the formal interviews, we take him or her out to dinner, office parties and even bowling. We talk sports, movies, politics and global events.” said she. I was not quite sure what the sports, dinners and office parties would achieve. “Well in a formal setting, the candidate will always say the right thing and conduct themselves with restraint. In a casual setting the guard is gradually let down to reveal their true self and that’s what we want to know, the real person, because it is this person who will be eventually running the firm as CEO. You will be astonished, but many of the candidates, even the best of the best, get rejected because of missteps during these informal occasions. They drink too much during parties, quarrel or cheat during sports, or show no sportsmanship all because they think nobody is watching. We usually prefer candidates who are consistent in their behavior both during the formal and informal interactions. We do have unconventional candidates but at long as they not pretenders we hire them. The types we immediately reject are the Janus folks who are at their best when everybody I watching and turn into animals when they think they are not being observed.”
The Campaign 2016 for the White House is essentially an interview process of the candidate by the voting public for the US Presidency. But the voting public do not have the luxury of an informal interview. All appearances on television from campaign rallies to interview on news channels and even late night comedy shows are often scripted. The possibility of a spontaneous moment is unlikely. With this in mind let’s look at the candidates running for President.
* * * * * * * * *
First the establishment candidate, Hillary Clinton. As a presidential
candidate we rarely see her move a finger out of tune, she always says and
behaves the way she is expected. She has been in the public arena for thirty
year and hence this had become second nature. She tells people what they want
to hear, the final aim is for her is secure a votes. We see her laughing, waving
and talking based on the audience before her. We even see her alter her accents
based on the audience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCyvyyo6dtQ
But what happens behind the closed doors, when she think nobody is
listening?
The following was said about Trump supporters before wealthy donors.
“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of
Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The
racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it.”
The following was said about Bernie supporters who she has been striving hard to win over, again before wealthy
donors
“They're children of the Great Recession and they are living in their
parents' basement. And so if you're consigned to, you know, being a barista or,
you know, some other job that doesn't pay a lot and doesn't have much of a
ladder of opportunity attached to it, then the idea that maybe, just maybe, you
could be part of a political revolution is pretty appealing.”
The following is her reaction while interacting with a young lady who
challenged her
In all three instances all Hillary is dealing with people disagree
with her. Being a ‘liberal’ you would think she would be tolerant, accepting
and respectful of diverse opinions. But instead she smugly dismisses and derides
them with utter contempt. She think of them as beneath her. Usually, an individual
who hold a type on type bias against one (in this case two) groups of people hold
another type bias against another people. This is the very definition of
bigotry i.e. intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from
oneself. But most importantly these are her word when she thinks nobody is
listening.
*
* * * * * * * *
Let’s now look at the GOP candidate and relative outsider Donald J
Trump. The one thing even the biggest anti Trump individual will tell you about
Trump is that with him what you see is what you get. We hear him talk without
filter about his political adversaries, his plans for America and even about his
business successes. Many a times his frankness and his proclivity to speak his
mind without restraint has got him into a sport of bother. But it also given
him a unique touch of authenticity that is almost impossible to find in
contemporary politics. Usually experts and pollsters author ever word that is uttered
by the candidate but not with Trump. The candidate usually hires agencies to manage
their social media presence, but even here Trump personally posts his tweets
and FB article. His campaign speeches are spontaneous with no Teleprompters, we
even see Trump tripping over his own sentences and even doing impromptu
impressions. But it is this unrehearsed honest that causes him to attract
thousands at his rallies.
A lot has made of Trump’s remarks about women, other than the ‘he said, she said type’ attacks, all there is Trump talking about women on adult comedy show with Howard Stern. Clearly Trump was being funny and it cannot be regarded as his real views and most importantly it was available in the public domain and he knew exactly how he was coming across.
Are there things he should not have said or tweeted? Sure there are. But that will happen when somebody is speaking straight from his mind. Politics for too long has become a business of appealing and appeasing to the people with politicians measuring every word that come out of their mouth. It is refreshing to hear a politician say things that are wrong but at least he is transparent.
In fact many have said that with Trump, while the public persona on
stage is larger than life and one who doesn’t hesitate to take a shot as his
opponents, upon meeting him in person once learns of the sensitive side.
* * * *
So once again the employers (voters) have a clear choice between two
candidates. One who tells you what he feels while the other who has words
authored by advisers. One who has an identical tone, attitude and words in both
public and private while the other who says one right thing in the public eye
and then says deeply bigoted things in private.
Does US want a president who thinks of a section people who don’t support
as xenophobes, racists and basement dwellers? Do the voter as employer whose
tax dollars will pay President’s salary want an employee who holds many
prejudiced opinions about them? Do the voters not want a change and elect a
President who will tell them the truth? As Mike Pence said you cannot lead when you loath.
Isn’t the choice perfectly obvious by now?
Come on America wake up and vote for him
Come on America wake up and vote for him
Comments
Post a Comment