Gandalf for President?

[Morthoron]

Actually, Gandalf was not the ultimate politician, Saruman was. Gandalf neither sought personal aggrandizement nor office for himself. He was not interested in taking down roots and he certainly did not seek dominion over others (which is why he forsook the use of the Ring). His role was to make or restore leaders, not become one, and when his task was finished he left for good (something no politician in history, not even the good ones, has done). If chosen, he would not run; if elected, he would not serve. He was a missionary or ambassador of the Valar, not a politician by definition.

Saruman, on the other hand, represented the political animal in all its sordid manifestations. He had the mesmerizing voice of a demagogue and was practiced at the art of propaganda. He created his own grass-roots constituency in Isengard, manipulated Rohan, deceived Dunland, betrayed the White Council, double-dealt his power-broker in Mordor, and set up a dictatorship in the banana republic of the Shire for his retirement.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Actually, Gandalf was not the ultimate politician, Saruman was .

Saruman was a power deriving freak, not a capable politician. If you used his policies, you are looking at another Hitler situation. Therefore, the thread question asks if Gandalf is the best candidate to take the top job in politics on grounds of ability alone, not by who is obssessed by politics. Gandalf was a far more astitute policy maker and governor of the free people.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Saruman was not a 'freak'; Morthoron shows examples of Saruman's political behaviour where he achieved much with the resources he had. As for the Hitler thing, bringing him up is likely to annoy someone out there, but implying that Hitler was not a capable politician is just strange.

But we're speaking about modern US politics. Saruman would feel far more at home there. Gandalf would despise the way image and slander are more important than the actual governing of people's lives.

Where so much power is concerned Gandalf would wish the wise to govern, and not the greedy rich. This suggests that Gandalf would not be interested in promoting democracy, at least to me.

[Durelin]

I would vote for Tom Bombadil.

I'm sorry, but this thread just feels like a jab to stir up political tension. Yes, we know a presidential election is coming up...

However, Eomer brings up a very interesting point about Gandalf with which I very much agree - Gandalf would not support even a pseudo-democratic-republic thingy...I mean, what was one of his big missions? To restore a wise king to the throne of Gondor. Conveniently a blood heir and benevolent.

(As for some things that have been said, I'm not sure we're discussing "modern US politics" or the "modern US media"...one may present the other and define the other in many ways, but there's a lot more to anything/anyone beyond a face... But no, I am not discussing politics! Noooo, did I take the bait??)

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Saruman was not a 'freak'; Morthoron shows examples of Saruman's political behaviour where he achieved much with the resources he had. As for the Hitler thing, bringing him up is likely to annoy someone out there, but implying that Hitler was not a capable politician is just strange.

Gandalf's policies easily outwitted those of Saruman's. Can you give me any examples of what Saruman actually achieved? Building an army of orcs and wargs is an achievement? In my book, anyone who abandons the forces of Good for orcs is weak and is a freak.

I totally imply that Hitler was a poor politician as much as Sauron would have been, if put in line with the context of this thread, as good ones always succeed, and always have bearings for the forces of Good. It is far easier to raise havoc as an evil leader of state using evil policies. I do not wish to liken a good politician with evil designs, however capable. This thread aimed to promote the forces of Good in Middle Earth, namely Gandalf. If you do not like this, please PM me with your thoughts. No more will be said further here.

Effectively, is Gandalf the best candidate we could have ever had to lead the US? Was he the ultimate Good politician?

[Kitanna]

Originally Posted by Mansun

Saruman was a power deriving freak, not a capable politician. If you used his policies, you are looking at another Hitler situation. Therefore, the thread question asks if Gandalf is the best candidate to take the top job in politics on grounds of ability alone, not by who is obssessed by politics. Gandalf was a far more astitute policy maker and governor of the free people.

But the ability to gain power like that can make a good politician. Power hungry or not Saruman would have made a better politician than Gandalf. Many distrusted Gandalf. The Hobbits found him a disturber of the peace, Grima, with Saruman's help, had Rohan convinced he was Stormcrow, Denethor was never thrilled with his presence. And it didn't bother him. He could be hated as long as he got the job done. As far as politicians go that's not what they want to strive for. Saruman and Sauron are both far superior as politicians. They could bend themselves into looking fair so people would follow them. Being a politician involves getting people to follow and support you, regardless of the ends. Gandalf was unbending in his ways and that makes a poor politician.

Can you give me any examples of what Saruman actually achieved? Building an army of orcs and wargs is an achievement? In my book, anyone who abandons the forces of Good for orcs is weak and is a freak.

He convinced Gandalf not to act on the Ring issue in the Shire. And Gandalf followed as if Saruman was a politician because he trusted Saruman's leadership.

Originally Posted by Kitanna

But the ability to gain power like that can make a good politician. Power hungry or not Saruman would have made a better politician than Gandalf. Many distrusted Gandalf. The Hobbits found him a disturber of the peace, Grima, with Saruman's help, had Rohan convinced he was Stormcrow, Denethor was never thrilled with his presence. And it didn't bother him. He could be hated as long as he got the job done. As far as politicians go that's not what they want to strive for. Saruman and Sauron are both far superior as politicians. They could bend themselves into looking fair so people would follow them. Being a politician involves getting people to follow and support you, regardless of the ends. Gandalf was unbending in his ways and that makes a poor politician.


He convinced Gandalf not to act on the Ring issue in the Shire. And Gandalf followed as if Saruman was a politician because he trusted Saruman's leadership.

You liken deception and persuasion with achievement. Personally, I would not. Gandalf had his doubts on this subject all along.

Ganadlf was not liked, at times, during the war against Sauron. But who ran out as comfortable triumphant at the end, more liked as ever before? Aragorn would have made him the chief advisor to Gondor, if he could.

[Kitanna]

Politics usually are about deception though. It's about getting people to follow you in any way possible regardless of how you do it. Successfully winning people to your side is at the heart of politics. Sauron and Saruman both did that. They successfully convinced many to follow them, giving them the upper hand against those who weren't as skillful at swaying the crowd.

Originally Posted by Kitanna

Politics usually are about deception though. It's about getting people to follow you in any way possible regardless of how you do it. Successfully winning people to your side is at the heart of politics. Sauron and Saruman both did that. They successfully convinced many to follow them, giving them the upper hand against those who weren't as skillful at swaying the crowd.

I agree with the above, except the highlighted bit. Using any means necessary in politics leads to extremism and tensions within a state. I prefer perception, not deception. as fundamental in politics.

[Nerwen]

It seems to me that there is a bit of semantical confusion going on here.

I believe Mansun is saying that Gandalf would have made a good politician while others are saying that Saruman would have made (indeed, was) a good politician.

You're talking about two different things.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

It seems to me that there is a bit of semantical confusion going on here.

I believe Mansun is saying that Gandalf would have made a good politician while others are saying that Saruman would have made (indeed, was) a good politician.

You're talking about two different things.

I can see why the confusion started out, but I could not imagine anyone adovcating a vote for Saruman on his record, and amongst other excellent candidates. Gandalf, afterall, was the Steward of Middle Earth, and an astonishingly good one, using ambition with a conscience.

Who would you vote for, Nerwen? I would think it a toss of the coin between Gandalf the White, and Elrond. Sauron and Saruman lose out due to ultimately delivering poor results in the LOTR. In pure political terms though, Sauron probably comes up top.

[Durelin]

Originally Posted by Mansun

Aragorn would have made him the chief advisor to Gondor, if he could.

Yep, and I think this is a good thing to point out. I see Gandalf as an advisor, not a leader. He's the behind-the-scenes guy. He manipulates when he needs to, to make sure those who are the leaders, I guess the politicians in this discussion, are doing what they should within a greater plan.

Oh semantics...yes, I think Mansun means 'good politician' as equivalent to 'good leader'?