Lost on a Deserted Island: Choosing the Right Leader
Imagine being stranded on a deserted island. Would you bring a political figure, a celebrity, or a loved one? This article explores the thought process behind selecting a presidential candidate or leader to bring on such an adventure. We'll dive into multiple perspectives and see why different individuals might choose different options.
Why Trump?
Some might argue that the most logical choice for survival on a deserted island would be none other than Donald Trump. Here are a few reasons why:
Reducing Spotlight and Normalizing Society
Many favor the idea of keeping Trump out of the spotlight during their time on the island. This could help in reducing the public's focus on political issues and allowing society to return to a sense of normalcy. Moreover, Trump's expansive figure could offer a practical advantage. His size could be reminiscent of well-marbled meat that doesn't require much physical work, and with boiling seawater, it could be made palatable. In addition, with a large hide, one might consider building a kayak to paddle back to civilization, although Trump's small hands might not be the best choice for paddling.
Silence and Survival
Others might prefer Pelosi, believing that a leader who can't command attention would provide a new opportunity to focus on survival. Pelosi's absence might lead to a motivation to build a boat or raft to escape, or even the daring swim to the ocean with the risk of shark encounters. This could be a psychological boost as one might be more resolute in escaping after facing such a threat.
The Appeal of Obama
For some, former President Obama could be the perfect choice. He offers a charismatic and engaging conversation, making time pass more quickly. He might also be more than one's only speaker, as Obama is known for his ability to listen as well as to speak. His presence would not only be a source of motivation but also a companion to pass the time and engage in meaningful conversations.
A Call to Labor
Bringing Trump to the island might also send a clear message that even the wealthiest individuals must work for their survival. In a setting where no resources are available, Trump, the world's third-richest person, would have to contribute to their subsistence. This could involve working for food and crafting shelters. It's important to emphasize that such an experience would provide a stark contrast to his privileged lifestyle, potentially allowing him to understand the value of hard work and the challenges faced by ordinary people.
The Royal Pick: Queen Elizabeth II
The idea of bringing the Queen to an island might seem beyond imagination, but there are several reasons for this choice:
Learning Opportunities and Public Efforts
By bringing the Queen, one could gain invaluable knowledge and wisdom. She has extensive experience and a vast network of people willing to help in her situations. Moreover, the sheer number of people willing to save the Queen could make the rescue more likely and efficient.
The Attractive Alternative: Sanna Marin
For those focused on appearance rather than political ability, Sanna Marin of Finland might be the preferred pick. She is often celebrated for her charm and good looks, making her a companion one might prefer over the political 'ass-holes.' Her presence could provide a welcome distraction and a focus on something simpler, such as physical appearance, in a time of crisis.
Ultimately, the choice of a leader on a deserted island is highly subjective and depends on personal values, needs, and circumstances. Whether it's for survival, companionship, or temporary relief, the above options offer a range of perspectives on what could make or break a stranded individual's chances of survival.