Join the new world

Recently, we've once more seen comments and articles suggesting that Antonio shoul not be elected because he cannot be trusted.

I understand, appreciate, and even share these voiced concerns with promoting Antonio to the Presidency based on his past actions. As I have repeatedly said elsewhere, I personally haven't forgotten this myself. I never will. Trust must be earned, and given the degree to which he lost mine, it'll be certainly longer than two months before I can fully trust him. It's possible I never shall, and will always have lingering doubts of his motives.

However, I agree with what Jesse said here, that basing objection to him solely on these grounds doesn't advance the debate all that much at this point. I think (or rather hope) that everyone in eThailand knows his role in the corruption under Rockman as well as they know of the contrition he expressed for it after Rockman was finally ousted. This is old news. It's still relevant, but there are more pressing concerns. Character certainly counts, but I'd rather see this election decided based on policy.

Limiting the debate to character plays into the personality politics that have plagued eThailand for far too long. Rockman was elected and re-elected because of personality politics. If the only criteria by which Antonio is judged is character, we're falling back into this selfsame trap of personality politics. Those who are on good terms with him now will unhesitatingly take at face value his claims to be a changed man, and grow frustrated that people constantly revive "old", "settled" matters. Political polarization will increase, and dialogue will break down. We know what Antonio did; the truth of that is not open to debate. We know he says he's changed; the truth of that cannot be judged as of yet. So if all we're to look at is character, we either forgive Antonio his past wrongs and trust his word that he's change, or we don't forgive him and/or don't trust his contrition. These beliefs won't be swayed by debating the settled history any further, I fear. If all we consider is "character", we muddy the waters, lock the "for" and "against" people into their camps, and turn the election into a popularity contest.

I don't think anyone who cares about the future of eThailand wants its leader to be determined by a popularity contest. The office of President has real powers and responsibilities. Being a "nice guy" or a "helpful guy" isn't really relevant. Being trustworthy is important, but it's a bare-minimum requirement, not the ne plus ultra. We need to elect the president who is the most capable of executing a sound, coherent economic and political plan for the direction of the nation. We need someone with a platform well-grounded in policy.

And in terms of policy, Antonio comes up short. He frankly admits his plan to largely keep the current administrative structure, but fails to really explain how he intends to integrate the changes he does anticipate into this. Indeed, his platform in general lacks any real overarching plan. There is no tax policy, nor even any apparent perceived need for one. Some of his plans appear to undermine others. Others appear vague and more than a little platitudinous. The amount of detail devoted to various plans seems somewhat haphazard; he devotes just 2 lines to currency deflation and monetary manipulation (with honestly few further details forthcoming upon request); such a program would have grave impact on the eThai economy. Yet he allots 14 to the structure of new lotto programs. Fourteen. He sees the need to lay out in his very platform technical and administrative details of government-run gambling programs, but glosses over even overarching methodologies (to say nothing of details) of quite serious economic manipulations, deeming those to be details to be worked out by whoever administers the program, not him.

Does this example seem petty? I hope it doesn't. I don't want a figurehead with no plan to be installed at the helm of the eThai state. Antonio's platform sounds "nice", but it's not robust. His "decentralized" plan appears to be to assemble a solid team then sit back and let them "do their thing" individually. I'm sorry, but if that's all we're to do, why do we even need a president?

Give me a president. Give me someone who will assemble a good, knowledgeable team from across all party lines, then work with them to guide them according to a unified vision. Give me someone who's interested in understanding how their individual projects interact with each other and effect the overall plan for eThailand. Give me an engaged leader, not a warm but distant manager.

Give me Guy, not Antonio.