The difficulty I have is working out based on the short answers which candidates I want to back.
Where the real value of the candidate interactions has been, is in the additional explanation they've given, or how they've responded after being sent the Chimp Manifesto, or challenged on a particular view.
So what I'm looking for in a My ideal candidate:
- They should be intelligent and capable of understanding the intricacies of difficult concepts and decisions.
- The should seek public consultation (but rely on science, and rational facts in their final decision making).
- They should be compassionate and caring about the electorate, and about humanity as a whole.
- They should be inclusive, seeking to find ways of finding common ground on different ideals.
- They should be malleable - which is too often seen as a weakness in leaders. I really admire someone who will fight hard for what they believe in BUT is also capable of saying "I was wrong", or "your way is better", or "how about 'this' as a compromise"
- They should exude minimum political spin.
I've rated the responses on a spectrum from views I really disagree with, to views I support - AND included in my thinking whether I'm happy with their response or follow up responses.
I've also included a "Intelligent Response/Rational Response" column in my scoring table.
For me, this is actually a VERY important column - It is a necessary quality in a leader.
Check out the start of scoring - I'll be adding QLD senate tonight/tomorrow - then I'll get on to NSW and ACT.
ObM.
No comments:
Post a Comment