Rethinking candidate requirements during elections

If we are going to elect a president, PM or a public official that will have power over significant parts of our lives and the country, I think it is reasonable to test how they would respond in certain situations before an election. 

With social media, elections have devolved into nothing more than popularity and PR competitions. There's rarely anything of substance to judge a candidate. It's time to rethink what we need to see from a candidate before an election. 

Instead of listening to prepared speeches or listening to debates full of empty words, we need a way to show these politicians in action. More specifically, what they would do in certain situations, how would they work with their team, how would they lead, how would they think through the situation. 

In the corporate world, assessment centres have been used to assess if a person is ready for a more senior position. An assessment centre is where person go through ‘a day in the life of’ (generally of a position more senior) to see how they handle the situations and issues that are commonly faced by someone in that position. In the military, assessment and running through different scenarios is common in testing the preparedness of an individual. I think it's time we incorporate this for our elections to ensure that we know the capabilities of these candidates.

So this is what it would look like:

Each candidate will assemble small teams based on specific areas that the country wants to see them demonstrate their skills in. For example, the economy, healthcare, education, foreign relations. Candidates will be given scenarios, data, and role players that they can work with to come up with a solution. A possible scenario could be something like a foreign nation just attacked and taken over a US consulate with hostages. Or perhaps like a major bank has collapsed and sending Wall Street in a free fall. Let's see how the candidates would go about handling these issues.

This assessment will let us (voters) see how the candidate work with their teams and the quality of the solution that they come up with. We will see how they during a crisis. We will get to see their leadership qualities (or lack of). With this, voters will be better be able to judge who they should vote for.

One thing that Covid-19 has shown is that all these (usually men) who talks a big game have no clue how to lead during an actual crisis. They’re all mediocre used car salesmen who can charm you with their words, but have no capacity to lead or know what to do.  

What do you think?