Just in case you missed it...

[_canpakes]

After the past 3+ years, I’d have thought that you’d gotten used to how that looks, by now. : D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fgDxAASI_c

Do it for the children, Markk. : )

[_Jersey Girl]

So, Jersey Girl, I read your post twice just so you know. I appreciate the in depth analysis. I think we're just going to have to disagree on this point. I think the points you make are valid, for people who work directly with children and develop curriculum for their respective districts. For a national-level position, I just think it's waaaaaay beyond the kind of interaction you describe being necessary or needed.

The people who make decisions for their district from faculty to administration, follow required procedures regarding evaluation and assessment of curriculum, policy development, and environmental needs, as well as those procedures to secure state/federal funding.

I'm not entirely sure if this happens during the coursework of your typical elem. principal let's say, but my administrative coursework included the construction of a school from the literal ground up. That included administrative policy, procedures, creation of forms, curriculum, annual budget, the physical building plan including square footage, and materials (ex: how many sinks/toilets what kind, what size, where mounted, and how much do they cost? Floor coverings, required indoor surfaces, types of windows and doors, locks, etc. ), heating systems, equipment (all equipment indoor and outdoor), all in compliance with various state statutes (social services, health department, fire department, building code--kill me) including outdoor areas, fencing, cost of required outdoor surfaces, what kind of fence and cost, how many tons of sand and how deep and of course, end of course final exam on those state statutes---knowing them inside and out and how to synthesize and cross reference those into our plans. And finally, how to fund it using outside resources such as state/federal grants, private donors, on top of tuition income to pay back outstanding loans.

I mean, I know how to plan and build a school right down to the door knobs including the program it houses and the administration thereof, Cam. Final project right there.

I mean, what happens when candidate #6, the last one 'interviewed' by the child, who has the final say on the matter, and the candidate states, "And just so you know, I'm going to make sure kids get chocolate chip cookies every day with their school lunch.", and winks at the child?

Okay so the child in question is age 9, not a 3 year old. So let's not disrespect his ability to pose relevant and thoughtful questions while essentially feeling out the candidate.

This is how I see it going. I see Warren doing the vetting until she reaches say, 3 final candidates. She's approved each of the three as desirable, having gone over their credentials/resume, panel and/or one:one interviewed them and she's ready to choose. Her last step is to use her student resource as the final vote. Personally, I'd be sitting in on the conversation (fly on the wall) or video taping it somehow so I could observe it and have a record of it.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with that process. But again, we'll never see this happen in practice because I don't see her winning the White House. Not gonna happen.

Whatever the case may be, the fact that Markk took Warren seriously is perhaps a nice example of why Trump succeeded in the GOP primaries, AND a good example of why pandering to extremists is disastrous for a head of state. I mean. I'd still vote for Warren if she gets the nomination, so it doesn't really matter what kinds of weird promises she makes on the campaign trail.

- Doc

Yep, I hear you and I'd vote for her, too. At this point if I had to go outside and start my car, I'd vote for the running car.

I think that what you're saying is that many or most Trump supporters are easy to scam because they are vulnerable to the posturing/flexing, they want to hear all the good crap right words without taking time to reading the actual contract and if that is the case, I tend to agree.

And I guess what I'm saying is that I'm okay with Warren's idea about passing the smell test. God knows, Trump supporters have no bloody clue what a smell test is much less have they bothered to run him through it.

p.s. I'm good with agreeing/disagreeing. And I meant what I said previously about what I knew you would do with my post because you just did it true to form in front of God and everybody. You're capable of good faith conversation and I appreciate that.

[_Jersey Girl]

Cam, here look. Here's Warren speaking to the student in question. The first line is about Devos.

So, when I’m president, she’ll be gone. (applause) And here’s my plan, Jacob: I’m gonna find just the right Secretary of Education, but here’s what I plan to do. I want to make sure that the person that I think is the right Secretary of Education meets you and hears your story and then I want you to tell me if you think that’s the right person and then we’ll make the deal.

See? That's the process I just described in my recent above. She selects the final candidate(s) and then the student resource provides the final input.

[_EAllusion]

If the left is serious about defeating a incumbent president with a rising economy...they really need to have someone people can identify with...like Gabby,

She is by a fair amount the least popular Democrat. Your rock-solid election advice is to go with the least popular Democrat that just so happens to be well-liked by alt-right culture that influences the media you listen to? Are you capable of separating what you like from what is sound election strategy?

[_EAllusion]

When I've hired people for positions, as one of my final steps I usually have a intellectually disabled person interview them and take seriously their input to the point that the final decision is significantly influenced by them. Their not approving is a near-certain deal-breaker. Of course those candidates are pre-vetted by our recruiter and me, but there are important reasons why that final step happens. It occurs to me that DocCam would be guffawing at the fact that I let "retards" make employment decisions.

[_EAllusion]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-elizabeth-warren-says-she-wont-pick-an-education-secretary-until-they-are-approved-by-a-young-trans-person

The child in the end will make the choice....listen to what she said...

Good luck spinning this one.

If you are going to be so particular on this point, what she actually said is that a pre-vetted candidate list would have to win the approval of a trans child that this person would be committed to fostering environments that promote their safety and well-being. It's promising to outsource that aspect of the vetting process to a small child. It's more a veto power than a final-say. If you're gonna pull the "My God, listen to her words," bit, you probably should listen to her words first.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

It occurs to me that DocCam would be guffawing at the fact that I let "retards" make employment decisions.

Well, you work with them. Of course it makes sense to incorporate them into your process. The fact that you conflate your position with a national level appointment isn't surprising to me in the least.

- Doc

[_Jersey Girl]

When I've hired people for positions, as one of my final steps I usually have a intellectually disabled person interview them and take seriously their input to the point that the final decision is significantly influenced by them. Their not approving is a near-certain deal-breaker. Of course those candidates are pre-vetted by our recruiter and me, but there are important reasons why that final step happens. It occurs to me that DocCam would be guffawing at the fact that I let "retards" make employment decisions.

EA you might not want to think of me as such, but we are at least somewhat cut from the same cloth.

Sorry about that! I know it hurts!

[_Jersey Girl]

It occurs to me that DocCam would be guffawing at the fact that I let "retards" make employment decisions.

Well, you work with them. Of course it makes sense to incorporate them into your process. The fact that you conflate your position with a national level appointment isn't surprising to me in the least.

- Doc

But Cam. It follows a line of principled reasoning that can easily be translated to a national level.

[_Jersey Girl]

ETA: Why do you see EA's process as being limited to local level?