Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

[Political Speculation & Theory] 21st Century Theodore Roosevelt


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 68 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

To put it simply, what would a 21st century Theodore Roosevelt be as a candidate for President of the United States?


A proponent of invading Cuba, massacring Fillippinos and "free trade" with China?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
A proponent of invading Cuba, massacring Fillippinos and "free trade" with China?

I think this person would be much more complex than that, Comrade Anklebiter. :)

Shadow Lodge

I was just gonna go with "awesome".


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Crazy awesome.

"Let's make sure to preserve our wildlife, America! SO I CAN HUNT IT."


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
A proponent of invading Cuba, massacring Fillippinos and "free trade" with China?

Sounds like a Nobel Peace Price winner to me! #thosecrazyNorwegians

Qadira

Republican
Strong pro southern Connections through his wife
Alpha Male
Taxidermy at a young age
Left Established military service to pursue mercenary work with rough riders outside american borders
Sucked at maths
achieved personal growth to overcome physical weakeness
Multilingual (French and German)
Intelligent Naval Tactician Capable of Doctorate level thinking

Category: Protowarlord (Sun Tsu)

The kind of guy who would have ended Homelessness, unemployment, and Prostitution through conscription for front line Deployment in Iraq. He would have Nuked Afghanistan and Pakistan for harboring Terrorists.


Turin the Mad wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
A proponent of invading Cuba, massacring Fillippinos and "free trade" with China?

I think this person would be much more complex than that, Comrade Anklebiter. :)

Sorry, Citizen The Mad, I was just trying to do some preemptive trolling of TR-loving Comrade HD.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Roosevelt is the only President to earn both the Medal of Honor and the Nobel Peace Prize.

He is the first of only three Presidents to have earned the latter. He was younger than JFK when sworn into the Oval Office at the age of 42 (JFK was 43).

What did he do to earn his Nobel Peace Prize? For negotiating the end to the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. Note that both the Russians and the Japanese agreed to the mediation.

The 21st century T. Roosevelt I'm thinking as a person would have the following characteristics/traits as a politician:

  • Fights against corruption and machine politics/ patronage or spoils politics at all levels of govornment. "An iron-willed leader of unimpeachable honesty." (Attributed to the NYPD history department.) I can see this along the lines of setting an egg timer for lobbyists to make their pitch before tossing them out of his office. He massively reformed the NYPD in a mere two years from being considered one of the most corrupt in the US and "trust-busted" throughout his Presidency.
  • Believes in military preparedness. "Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far." While he was very aggressive by 21st century standards, my impression is that this 'T. Roosevelt' would aggressively pursue modernization and readiness while generally maintaining a non-interventionist doctrine. The gawds pity the fool that gives casus belli however...
  • As much as this T. Roosevelt might wish to drop the hammer as evidenced by the previous phrase, Big Stick ideology is less about using the Big Stick and more about making sure that the Big Stick was visible. Examples include his resolution of the UMW coal strike of 1902 and showing "the Big Stick" by way of the Great White Fleet. Interesting, that big fleet. ;)
  • He passed some rather key pieces of legislation. The Meat Inspection Act of 1906 and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, both enacted on the same day after investigations ordered because of famous muckracking - and the subsequent investigations that found conditions sufficiently disgusting after what appears to have been a 3 week advance notice attempt by the slaughterhouses to make things look better. The 21st century T. Roosevelt would pursue similarly common sense legislation that protects the citizenry from corporate asshattery and mistreatment.
  • A person of principle - this person would not waffle in their personal convictions to sail fickle political winds just to garner party nomination.
  • An enthusiastic supporter of the Boy Scouts of America, apparently the historical T. Roosevelt is the only person to hold the title of Chief Scout Citizen. I'm not sure what the 21st century version of this would be asides from the obvious 'was a Boy Scout or Girl Scout'. I'm thinking maybe more along the lines of being a well-rounded person.
  • An enthusiastic conservationist and naturalist, to wit the Newlands Reclamation Act of 1902 that the historical T. Roosevelt supported, specially amended to include Texas in 1906. More importantly, he established the US Forest Service, the first 150 National Forests, 18 new Monuments, 5 National Parks, 4 Game Preserves aand 51 Bird Preserves.


Teddy Roosevelt: An American Sissy

An essay by Gore Vidal


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Teddy Roosevelt: An American Sissy

An essay by Gore Vidal

:) Interesting reading to be sure. It is pretty entertaining that the "20th century answer to Oscar Wilde" called TR that very name. ^___^

Wikipedia linky:
According to Wikipedia he called himself a 'gentleman byotch', ironic given that he apparently calls TR a sissy...


GV was always quick with the anti-gay slurs--although he's not calling TR a homosexual. An early proponent of the "taking the word back" school, I think.

He was also an early example and a shining model of politrolling.

[Bows before my master]

Taldor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Turin the Mad wrote:

Roosevelt is the only President to earn both the Medal of Honor and the Nobel Peace Prize.

He is the first of only three Presidents to have earned the latter. He was younger than JFK when sworn into the Oval Office at the age of 42 (JFK was 43).

What did he do to earn his Nobel Peace Prize? For negotiating the end to the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. Note that both the Russians and the Japanese agreed to the mediation.

The 21st century T. Roosevelt I'm thinking as a person would have the following characteristics/traits as a politician:

  • Fights against corruption and machine politics/ patronage or spoils politics at all levels of govornment. "An iron-willed leader of unimpeachable honesty." (Attributed to the NYPD history department.) I can see this along the lines of setting an egg timer for lobbyists to make their pitch before tossing them out of his office. He massively reformed the NYPD in a mere two years from being considered one of the most corrupt in the US and "trust-busted" throughout his Presidency.
  • Believes in military preparedness. "Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far." While he was very aggressive by 21st century standards, my impression is that this 'T. Roosevelt' would aggressively pursue modernization and readiness while generally maintaining a non-interventionist doctrine. The gawds pity the fool that gives casus belli however...
  • As much as this T. Roosevelt might wish to drop the hammer as evidenced by the previous phrase, Big Stick ideology is less about using the Big Stick and more about making sure that the Big Stick was visible. Examples include his resolution of the UMW coal strike of 1902 and showing "the Big Stick" by way of the Great White Fleet. Interesting, that big fleet. ;)
  • He passed some rather key pieces of legislation. The
...

I'm not sure TR would really fit into either party these days, it would be fun to see.Great list btw.

Taldor

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

GV was always quick with the anti-gay slurs--although he's not calling TR a homosexual. An early proponent of the "taking the word back" school, I think.

He was also an early example and a shining model of politrolling.

[Bows before my master]

Buckley was better.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Callous Jack wrote:
I'm not sure TR would really fit into either party these days, it would be fun to see. Great list btw.

I believe that he would go all Bull Moose. ;)


Callous Jack wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

GV was always quick with the anti-gay slurs--although he's not calling TR a homosexual. An early proponent of the "taking the word back" school, I think.

He was also an early example and a shining model of politrolling.

[Bows before my master]

Buckley was better.

Perhaps. I, of course, share more common ground with Gore.

Obligatory link

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Callous Jack wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

GV was always quick with the anti-gay slurs--although he's not calling TR a homosexual. An early proponent of the "taking the word back" school, I think.

He was also an early example and a shining model of politrolling.

[Bows before my master]

Buckley was better.

Perhaps. I, of course, share more common ground with Gore.

Obligatory link

Now if political debates were like that, I think I would watch.


I have noted in conversations before that every clip of William Buckley that I have ever seen includes him threatening to punch somebody.

Buckley and Woody Allen

and then I'm done. Sorry about the threadcrap in your TR thread, Citizen The Mad.

Taldor

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

I have noted in conversations before that every clip of William Buckley that I have ever seen includes him threatening to punch somebody.

Buckley and Woody Allen

and then I'm done. Sorry about the threadcrap in your TR thread, Citizen The Mad.

I think you're right! I know he threatened Noam Chomsky at some point too.


I lied. Kind of. Was looking at the GV Wiki entry linked above and was saddened to learn that Joseph Heller died...13 years ago.

Sometimes it's hard to keep up.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

I lied. Kind of. Was looking at the GV Wiki entry linked above and was saddened to learn that Joseph Heller died...13 years ago.

Sometimes it's hard to keep up.

It seems that a lot of the cool people are dying like flies these days.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm still alive.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

I have noted in conversations before that every clip of William Buckley that I have ever seen includes him threatening to punch somebody.

Buckley and Woody Allen

and then I'm done. Sorry about the threadcrap in your TR thread, Citizen The Mad.

No worries, Citizen Anklebiter. Citizen Turin would probably be more appropriate, btw. ;)

I'm more interested in the "would some one of iron will and impeccable honesty with the local/state/national interest at the core of his/her political being" concept of TR as translated into a 21st century politician speculation.

I found it enlightening to read of his "Progressive" acts. Given that we're talking the turn of the 20th century, he did some pretty ballsy stuff for the time. Conservatism, assessing people based on their actions rather than their appearance drawing this from his written words and political appointments, one in New Orleans comes to mind, backing up leadership with action walking the late night and early hour beats in the rough parts of NYC at the time with his beat officers during his 2 years cleaning up NYPD, acting when the USS Maine blew up in Havana to get the USN ready for the events a year down the road, consistent actions against the "trusts" (mega-corporations in modern parlance), consistent actions against cronyism/ spoils / patronage rampant in the US at the time Chicago didn't get rid of its patronage system until the 1970s-1980s from the look of things and in general being a pro-active politician at the levels of office that he held at the times that he held them.

It is fascinating to read up on TR and of course reading also of those who were not his fans. The actions he undertook (USDA related acts, Forest Service, National Parks, modernizing the USN from sailing ships to steam, irrigation to permit permanent inhabitation of a vast swath of the midwestern States, conservatism, Boy Scouts, reforming the NYPD etc) and their enduring legacy 120 years later is what matters more than anything else given the positive nature of them.

A modern TR would be an unusually charismatic figure I would think. A great many in "the establishment" would either fear this person, or back TR's play.

Taldor

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Turin the Mad wrote:
[A modern TR would be an unusually charismatic figure I would think. A great many in "the establishment" would either fear this person, or back TR's play.

A big question would be how the press presented him. I imagine he wouldn't really suffer the "journalism" that we have today.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Callous Jack wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
[A modern TR would be an unusually charismatic figure I would think. A great many in "the establishment" would either fear this person, or back TR's play.
A big question would be how the press presented him. I imagine he wouldn't really suffer the "journalism" that we have today.

I disagree. I'm pretty sure the opposition would be very very quick to paint him as an imbecile, a thug, and a warmonger.

Taldor

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Orthos wrote:
Callous Jack wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
[A modern TR would be an unusually charismatic figure I would think. A great many in "the establishment" would either fear this person, or back TR's play.
A big question would be how the press presented him. I imagine he wouldn't really suffer the "journalism" that we have today.
I disagree. I'm pretty sure the opposition would be very very quick to paint him as an imbecile, a thug, and a warmonger.

Since he seemed to cross [modern] party lines on many things he did, I wonder whether any of that would stick.

Shadow Lodge

Might be I'm just a cynic, but I see both sides harping on him for trying to straddle the parties rather than sticking to one line or the other. But yes, the question is whether or not it would stick.


Hey Anklebiter, got any nasty things to say about Bob LaFollette?


No, but that's only because I don't know enough about him.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

No, but that's only because I don't know enough about him.

Never been an obstacle before :P


Ah! One from the archives:

"Fighting Bob" Smashes Milk-Drivers' Strike, The Appeal to Reason, September 17, 1903


You can't trick me. I know a grateful dead link when I see it!!!


I don't believe you. That Milk-Driver's Strike touch was awesome and I know you fell for it.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
I don't believe you. That Milk-Driver's Strike touch was awesome and I know you fell for it.

It's called mouseover. Not exactly rocket surgery!


Well, it may not be that, but it's beyond me. You hover your mouse over a link and it tells you where it's going?

Shadow Lodge

I think there's a few add-ons that will change the display from just the URL to whatever the link's destination puts in your status bar.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Well, it may not be that, but it's beyond me. You hover your mouse over a link and it tells you where it's going?

Si señor. I saw YouTube and immediately had traumatic flashbacks to previous Anklebiter DeadRolls (TM)


[sigh]

I'm going to have to devise a new gimmick to troll Citizen Meatrace.

You gotta give me credit, though. Milk Drivers was a nice touch.

EDIT: On second thought, you had traumatic flashbacks. Good enough.


Orthos wrote:
I think there's a few add-ons that will change the display from just the URL to whatever the link's destination puts in your status bar.

My mouse does none of that. :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:
Might be I'm just a cynic, but I see both sides harping on him for trying to straddle the parties rather than sticking to one line or the other. But yes, the question is whether or not it would stick.

After a few years of dealing with the "two parties only or the highway" bit, perhaps TR would go and carve a new 3rd party out of the "dissatisified middle" (the 30% that didn't vote for the party they voted for but rather against the other party this last go 'round). That leaves 35% as "core" to the Dems and 'pubs, with a 30% basis for a 3rd majority party that would then start pulling the centrists out of the remainder in each current majority party.

A voice of moderation in between the strident voices of extremism that has come to plague current politics perhaps?

Shadow Lodge

He couldn't be elected today, he's too wild.

Hell, he couldn't normally be elected president in his own day, he only got in because he was vice president, and he only got THAT because of some odd political wrangling.


Callous Jack wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Callous Jack wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
[A modern TR would be an unusually charismatic figure I would think. A great many in "the establishment" would either fear this person, or back TR's play.
A big question would be how the press presented him. I imagine he wouldn't really suffer the "journalism" that we have today.
I disagree. I'm pretty sure the opposition would be very very quick to paint him as an imbecile, a thug, and a warmonger.
Since he seemed to cross [modern] party lines on many things he did, I wonder whether any of that would stick.

Two things:

  • I'm thinking the "modern TR" would definitely not suffer fools gladly ... and TR'd come armed to the teeth with a photographic memory I'm presuming the modern TR inherited the historical's photographic memory here, factually dismembering anyone spewing aphorisms.
  • A "modern TR" I doubt would express things as hawkishly as we saw in this last campaign, but rather toe the "speak softly, big stick" line. Non-interventionism seems to suit better, a prepared non-interventionism to be sure. The modern Somali pirates I doubt would still be around, for example, at least not on the high seas. The "Great White Fleet" of his time would have razed them to ash if they could.

Taldor

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:

He couldn't be elected today, he's too wild.

Hell, he couldn't normally be elected president in his own day, he only got in because he was vice president, and he only got THAT because of some odd political wrangling.

He did become president after McKinley's death but he won the 1904 election as well.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Might be I'm just a cynic, but I see both sides harping on him for trying to straddle the parties rather than sticking to one line or the other. But yes, the question is whether or not it would stick.

After a few years of dealing with the "two parties only or the highway" bit, perhaps TR would go and carve a new 3rd party out of the "dissatisified middle" (the 30% that didn't vote for the party they voted for but rather against the other party this last go 'round). That leaves 35% as "core" to the Dems and 'pubs, with a 30% basis for a 3rd majority party that would then start pulling the centrists out of the remainder in each current majority party.

A voice of moderation in between the strident voices of extremism that has come to plague current politics perhaps?

Because that's what we need. A moderate right party between the extreme right party and the center right party.

We have an extreme right. The Republicans are constantly screaming about the Free Market and small government, even if they really only mean lower taxes and less social programs.
There is no equivalent on the left. Despite constant claims from the right, Democrats aren't even preaching socialism, much less practicing it. They might occasionally humbly suggest that we not dismantle the welfare programs or maybe even try to help out a little bit more or tax rich people just a couple of percent higher, but it rarely actually comes to anything.

Where's the strident voice of leftist extremism?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

[Clears throat]


But, seriously, I was going to ask that in a less confrontational way. I figure us lefties have free reign in Living under Obama , might as well let the centrists have their own thread.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

He couldn't be elected today, he's too wild.

Hell, he couldn't normally be elected president in his own day, he only got in because he was vice president, and he only got THAT because of some odd political wrangling.

Less "odd political wrangling" and more "Oh dear lord, put him at a nice quiet desk so he can't go ruin everything...wait, WHO died? Crud."

Best accident. Or at least extremely entertaining for historians accident.

Qadira

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
But, seriously, I was going to ask that in a less confrontational way. I figure us lefties have free reign in Living under Obama , might as well let the centrists have their own thread.

You mean Anarchists were being rounded up by FBI and bought before Congress to answer questions as to their loyalties before Obama?


Scintillae wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

He couldn't be elected today, he's too wild.

Hell, he couldn't normally be elected president in his own day, he only got in because he was vice president, and he only got THAT because of some odd political wrangling.

Less "odd political wrangling" and more "Oh dear lord, put him at a nice quiet desk so he can't go ruin everything...wait, WHO died? Crud."

Best accident. Or at least extremely entertaining for historians accident.

That wasn't an accident!

[Boom! Boom! Rat-a-tat-tat!]

What's that, Comrade Dingo? I have no idea what you're saying!

[Boom! Boom! Rat-a-tat-tat!]

Shadow Lodge

Callous Jack wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

He couldn't be elected today, he's too wild.

Hell, he couldn't normally be elected president in his own day, he only got in because he was vice president, and he only got THAT because of some odd political wrangling.

He did become president after McKinley's death but he won the 1904 election as well.

As an incumbent. Political systems tend to be very conservative and panicky about trying anything new. The real barrier to someone outside the usual getting elected isn't the electorate its the party politics that puts them on the ballot. Once he was the president the political machine was stuck with him.

1 to 50 of 68 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Off-Topic Discussions / [Political Speculation & Theory] 21st Century Theodore Roosevelt All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.