Those are minimum requirements, not credentials.I don't know your "bartender," so I can't comment. Having spent some time on both sides of a bar though, I wouldn't express your preference to him.
My bartender meets the minimum requirements. I'm not going to vote for him either.
Really? Are you actually going to play that game? Another guy who needs proof of the obvious?
In this land of 320 million, you don't think a whole bunch of people will think that is a weakness? Do you want a list of their names or something? Addresses, too?
BTW, "keep" "up" "the" "good" "work" "with" "all" "the" "meaningless" "quotation" "marks". Originally Posted by ExNYer
Out of 320 million there are some ... who can't think, some that shouldn't think, and some who can't vote even if they can or should. There are also a whole bunch of folks who vote for someone or not vote for someone because of their skin color.
If you think it's a "weakness" so be it. I think it's not. I know folks who have no college who are smarter, have more common sense, and better administrators than many people with doctorate degrees. And then I know some who have doctorate degrees who can't zip up their pants after pissing without catching their tie (in fact one was a Latin professor of mine).
By the same token I had a long time acquaintance who was the wealthiest, most successful, and well connected person I have known personally. Been in the White House as a guest with every President in my life time until he died. He watched the super bowls in the President's box regularly. I put down in a twin on his residence driveway and rode in his pvt jet across the country. He didn't finish the 5th grade.
There are always extremes to every argument or discussion, and the extreme examples are not the "target audience" in a campaign strategy. All that I am saying is of the qualified voters in this country the average is going to be about 70% who DON'T HAVE A FOUR YEAR DEGREE. It's probably not a good "campaign strategy" to offend 70% of the market, particularly when that 70% contains one's primary target for success.
The word "petty" comes to mind.
There are so many other factors to consider.
I'll give you an example of "marketing strategy" going bad.
Hershey had 85% of the candy bar market with almonds and no almonds. (Years ago). A new "ad company" decided it had to do something (to seem "relevant"). It recommended and got approved a change in that brown wrapper .. from the old dull finish to the high gloss finish. Nothing else changed. Within a year (less) Hershey had about 30% of the market.
The rest is history.
If you can't figure out the relevance of not fucking with what works, well?
