Colin Powell....why is he so well liked?

[VoodooAce]

Just curious what some opinions would be about this. I'm a Dem, but I like the guy, as does the overwhelming majority of America, I think.

Why? What's he ever really done? What exactly is it about this guy?

Will he run in 2008 and try to unseat a President mid-term?

Is there anybody that could beat him in an election? Why not?

 

[sonorakitch]

Good question. I suppose it is because he is so moderate. It is hard for most folks to dislike a moderate. And he is an American Hero (to most). He handled himself beautifully in Operation Desert Storm, and won the respect and admiration of the entire tuned-in populace. He is an excellent example of a real American in a sea of politics and politicians. Meager upbringing, ended up top of his West Point class, and worked his way up the ladder of the military. With that kind of resume, and his charisma and moderation, I can't imagine many giving him a close race--except maybe the now infamous, man-of-the-year Rudy Guliani.

~Chris

 

[joespaniel]

I'd say that about sums it up.

I'd vote for the man.

 

[allan]

He was going to run in 1996 (I believe it was), but decided not to out of distaste for the whole political game, and fear of its effects on his family. I've always said that politics don't often attract the best men, but the best scoundrels....

Sad that our political system scares off many men of integrity, like Colin Powell seems to be. We should look at how we can change that circumstance....

 

[joespaniel]

Hmm, seems to me Colin Powell just running for office would be a step in that direction...

 

[damunzy]

It would be tough to choose between Colin Powell or Rudy. I'd have to go with Powell b/c of health issues. Rudy's cancer or heart, I can't remember which puts him a little bit lower. But it would be cool to have a single prez in the office Wouldn't have to worry too much about scandal since he would be free to do what he wanted. That might make for good Television.
I am an independant.
I would rather see either of them in for Bush. The man is doing a good job, but doesn't project a presidentness about himself.

 

[Knowltok 2]

I'd say Rudi could run for about anything that he wanted to and win at this point. He has a pretty good track record too. As DA he decimated the mob and as mayor crime has dropped significantly. Things haven't been perfect, but he has gotten results, which is more than can be said for many would be politicians.

As for Collin Powell, another thing that makes him so popular is that he is what white people want black people to be like. I know that that comment could get a storm of protest, but I think it could be true. He is well spoken and educated, is more concerned with the business of running whatever he is in charge of than some social agenda, and is a great role model for anyone. Compare that to Jesse Jackson, and I think you'll see what I mean.

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

Colin Powel? I don't know ,but somehow i don't trust the guy.He's playing the actual president already IMO concerning international situation's.
It seems to me that Colin can be as ruthless as Bush in international relation's ,or in war time.I have no clue of his domestic vision's ,but as Non-American only the foureign policy of the presidential candidate's interrests me.In that sence it seems to me that Powel would only continue the sort of American foureign policy i always hated.And powel has been a important man in the Bush administration ,a administration that has done a lot of bad things IMO.

Beside's ,he's black.No black person has ever been the president of the US ,and somehow i doubt that something like that will happen within the next 50 years.

Guliani? He has gotten a lot of meadia attention ,as the "sensible" mayor ,as thus establishing a very good social image.But i don't know if that would make a good president.

 

[Hamlet]

I'm not an American, but I'd prefer Powell over Bush any day. At least Powell has a good idea about the outside world. I have a feeling that foreign policy would be slightly, although perhaps not hugely different if he was in the big job. I wish him luck if he does decide to run for Republican presedential candidate someday.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

"He's playing the actual president already IMO concerning international situation's."
Thats because he is SecState, and it is his job to concern himself with international situations. He is part of a team that was carefully put together, and that is working brilliantly and correctly.

The reasons he is well liked have been bought up to some extent: That he is a moderate, an American success story, and an embodiment of the American Dream in that respect, having rose from the Bronx through hard work and application. He is also liked and respected because he is very much associated with the victory in the Gulf War, where he made regular public appearences as the "face of the military" in that campaign, and also helped craft strategy.

He is experienced in military matters, something that is important for an effective foreign minister. But most of all, he is an effective diplomat, but not a career diplomat, who often carry the State Department's own agenda. He is not a politician, but knows politics

I agree also with Knowltok's analysis that "...he is what white people want black people to be like...He is well spoken and educated, is more concerned with the business of running whatever he is in charge of than some social agenda, and is a great role model for anyone."

Out of him, and Rudolph Giuliani, two most admirable and upright men, I dare say that Powell would make a better President due to his experience on the international scene, but Giuliani has a very good record in his managment of NYC. Powell will also be on the scene for longer.

SecState as potential President? Something you couldn't really say for Alexander Haig ("I am in charge here!"), Dr Henry, or even ol' Madeline Albright

 

[VoodooAce]

My opinion of they guy increased greatly after 9/11. He was the voice of calm and reason within the administration and seemed to win the debate early on on how to proceed.

Maybe it's just the hopeful liberal in me, but I really, honestly don't think race would be an issue for most people. A black Democrat, even a Colin Powell, probably couldn't do it because he wouldn't get the enough of the Republican vote.

Fact is, though, when I started the thread, his race didn't enter my mind and I didn't even think to ask if people would think race an issue.

I can also guarantee you that Powell would trounce Rudi in any general election. Might be a different story in a primary, but Rudi's popularity among Dems as a result of 9/11 is only temporary....we all know how notoriously short American memories are.

Remember that duh-bya's daddy had great approval numbers during and just after Desert Storm. Even early into 1992 he had good looking numbers and looked prepared to trounce whatever Dem was placed in front ofhim that Novermber. But a year is a long time, and November is still some time away.

 

[Knowltok 2]

>>Remember that duh-bya's daddy had great approval numbers during and just after Desert Storm. Even early into 1992 he had good looking numbers and looked prepared to trounce whatever Dem was placed in front ofhim that Novermber. But a year is a long time, and November is still some time away.<<

You are absolutely correct on this point. However don't discount Rudi too soon. New York is 5-to-1 democrat and if a Republican Mayor can be elected, he has to have some appeal to Democrats.

I've heard it mentioned that Rudi would make a good head of the CIA. Don't know if there is any basis to this though.

 

[allan]

In Guatemala, the mayor of Guatemala city is often the person who ends up becoming president, right after his mayorship.

Different story in the US of course, but running the largest city in the US is a complex job requiring good executive administrative skills. Giuliani wouldn't be a bad president, and he could hire someone experienced in foreign affairs to be his Sec of State and advise him accordingly--but domestically, he would be strong.

Besides, I tend to like "outsider" candidates more than tired, worn, and corrupted Beltway insiders. Colin Powell seems to be an exception to that in some ways anyway though.... He seems to be not after power so much as interested in doing his job--just like a soldier, which in his heart he is.

 

[sonorakitch]

I also think Guiliani could give Colin Powell a run for his money, but it would be a primary battle, and being that Powell is more moderate, Guiliani would have a better chance. Remember: primaries always give the more solidly Rep./Dem. the hat (ie. McCain-Bush).

Referring to the approval ratings in the Gulf War, I do think this is very different. This situation will have W's approval ratings up pretty high for some time. Persian Gulf brought a more bold (and some would say overconfident) society who rallied around our President because we were winning so splendidly. Today, many Americans actually feel threatened by this new force, and during such times, Presidents often enjoy high marks for years. Just look at FDR's astonishing victory in 1944 (not to say I could compare the two, though).

My $.02.

~Chris

 

[Richard III]

I actually despise the bastard, for two reasons, both arising from his service as Chair of the JCS:

#1 Unwillingness to support broader military action in Bosnia, when history has since proven that even the weakest variations on a "lift and strike" would have ended the war sooner.

#2 Desert Storm - Powell's ultracautious politics-before-victory approach was a key factor in leaving us with the worst of both worlds - Emirs running Kuwait but Saddam left in Iraq.

Powell is the politician's politician, the kind of "where does he stand today?" guy who the last 20 years of north american politics was supposed to marginalize.

 

[VoodooAce]

I agree with #1 for the most part.

But how much of #2 was his fault, and how much blame should his boss, duhbya's Dad, get? Personally, I've always blamed George I for this.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Forgive the pedantry, but to the best of my knowledge, the CJCS does not actually make policy. He offers advice, based upon his knowledge and experience.

To blame him soley for the decision of the Bush Administration is to simplify the issue. To push onwards to Baghdad would have meant a number of new factors - extended lines of supply, whole new campaign plans of much greater complexity, going beyond the UN mandate and thus upsetting various other powers. To take Baghdad would most probably have severely stretched and/or broke the fragile regional coalition.

There was no mandate to change the government of Kuwait.

They would have had to find Hussain, and take him out/capture him. More complications. Then, once the Hussain regime was deposed, what to put in its place. The Hussain dictatorship has been extremely effective in removing all potential opposition at its nascent stage.
Thus, what regime to put in place.
Lots of troops remain in place to back it up, and ensure that other powers do not move into the power vacuum. American people did not want a long term troop committment on the ground, but rather a quick, relatively painless victory to expunge the ghost of Vietnam.

It is unfortunate realpolitik, but "better the devil you know"

These are the arguments that are raised in this situation. I do not necessarily agree with all of them, but there is some merit in some of the arguments.

As to Bosnia, the pressure not to intervene further militarily was again not solely his call. It would not be stretching credibility to far to suggest that the Clinton administration, particularly in its early stages, was not one that viewed military action and foreign policy in general as matters of greatest importance, and their relationship with the military (and their opinion of it) was not the best.

Apportioning blame solely to Powell, and hating him vehmently for it, does not make full sense to me.

 

[knowltok3]

I must concur with Mr. Darkshade (Scary, huh? I just went out and purchased a berret and a large knife too!)

Hindsight says that it would likely have been for the best to go on to Bagdad and eliminate Saddam, but for all we know the other coalition members may have strongly opposed this. Had we gone ahead and done it anyway I can only imagine the howls of protest screaming about unilateralism, and the arrogant US making policy without considering world opinion.

It is of course possible that it was simply a msitake. An honest misjudgement of the situation and future ramifications. Men make mistakes, important men make important mistakes. The best we can hope for from our leaders is that they are competant and will use their good judgement for what they see at the time as the right course of action.

I still trust Collin Powell to try and do the right thing for the US and the world as a whole. This doesn't mean that he will always succeed, but perfection is too much to ask for.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

"I must concur with Mr. Darkshade (Scary, huh?"

Not really. People agree with me all the time. After an appropriate period of consideration and re education, and some gentle persuasion...

Your point on the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation that was confronting the Coalition at that stage is a real clincher. One can imagine the protests that would be raised about US disregard for world opinion, and imperialist conquest/oppression. The situation was a tenuous one in terms of holding together a very fragile group of states whose attitudes towards one another were rather antipathetic in some cases, to say the least.

And the follow up was good, raising the heretical notion that a man in a position of power can make a mistake. He must of deliberately set aside his crystal ball at that stage, motivated purely by malice...
Not many pundits gave Hussein that much time in power at the time; his continual survival is a surprise in one sense, and something to be expected in another (with a great deal of hindsight)
We cannot expect perfection, and the man HAS done a good job in his current role, and IMO did a very good one in his former role.

And no need for a beret and knife. Dress is simple suit and tie, optional weapon

 

[duke o' york]

I wouldn't mind him as President, as long as he starts to pronounce his name properly!!!!!!!!!
Aaaaaaargghhhhh!!!:crazyeyes :crazyeyes