Presidential?

          In the 2016 presidential election cycle there is a lot of commentary today by the political pundits/talking heads in the modern digital media about what it means to be “presidential” as if there was some universally recognized trait possessed  by all legitimate candidates for the President of the United States of America. If there is such a trait,  would it be honesty, dignity, intelligence, knowledge, kindness, tolerance, charisma,  gray hair, white hair, bleached hair or no hair  at all. Get the point? The term “presidential” is a meaningless term, signifying nothing!

          Was No. 2 (John Adams) any more or less  “presidential” than No. 1(George Washington)? Was No. 16 (Abraham Lincoln) any more or less “presidential” than No. 32 (Franklin Roosevelt)? Was No. 40 (Ronald Reagan) any more or less “presidential” than No. 42 (Bill Clinton)? Will No. 45 (???) be any more or less “presidential” than any one of the previous 44 presidents of the United States of America?

          Commonsense tells me that every one of the 44 occupants of the Whitehouse is presidential because that person is the President of the United States of America, not because that person possessed  a universally recognized “presidential” personality trait. Commonsense also tells me that so it will be  for the 45th  President of the United States of America who will be “presidential” because that person will be the President of the United States of America.

          Today Americans have lot more to be worried about that which candidate is “presidential.” Good Day!