Trump was never a Governor, or a Congressman, or a General. If elected, would he be the first President without political experience?
IIRC, Hoover – who’d been a Cabinet Secretary – was the only President to have neither served in the military not been elected to a previous office.
Dangit, I wrote “nor”! I curse you, spellcheck! I curse you!
Just curious – why do you consider having been a General as having political experience? Yes, it’s a government position, but it’s not an elected position.
If you consider anyone who has never held an elected position, the answer is Eisenhower. If you eliminate anyone who had had a government job, you’ve got to eliminate Hoover, too. Then I don’t know who it is, but I suspect it’s one of the Founding Fathers.
It’s generally considered that somebody who rises to the top military ranks has to be at least as good at being a “people manager” as he is at being a “battle manager,” to coin a phrase.
An acclaimed military genius who makes no attempt to get along with people will rise pretty high, but almost certainly not to the very top.
This was magnified 10-fold in the case of Eisenhower, who had to deal with multiple nationalities in the course of his daily duties, and could almost be considered a diplomat first, and a general second.
Well Zachary Taylor, from what I’ve read not only never held political office but never voted.
Nope - all of the founding fathers Presidents were heavily involved in government prior becoming President:
Washington: Virginia House of Burgesses (15 years); Continental Congress; General of the Army; Chairman of the Constitutional Convention.
Adams: Massachusetts Assembly; Continental Congress; Massachusetts Constitutional Convention; US diplomat, including first US Minister to the United Kingdom; Vice-President.
Jefferson: Virginia House of Burgesses; Governor of Virginia; Continental Congress; US Diplomat; Secretary of State; Vice-President
Madison: Virginia House of Burgesses; Continental Congress; House of Representatives in the first Congress under the Constitution; Secretary of State
Monroe: Virginia House of Delegates; Continental Congress; Virginia Convention on ratification of US Constitution (he was agin it); US Senator; Ambassador to France; Governor of Virginia; Secretary of State; Secretary of War.
It’s almost as if people back then thought that government experience was a positive thing for the President. 
Good one, and perhaps William Henry Harrison also. Actually I don’t think Andrew Jackson ever held office, though he did go through one presidential campaign before being elected.
I’ve read Churchill’s history of WW II, and there was tons of political pressure on Ike to invade in useful places for the politicians, so he had excellent experience.
Both Jackson and Harrison had extensive political experience, in addition to their military experience:
Jackson: one term in the House of Representatives; two terms (separated) in the US Senate; military governor of Florida.
Harrison: first territorial delegate to Congress from the North-West territory; governor of the Indiana Territory; terms in the House of Representatives and Senate from Ohio; minister plenipotentiary to Colombia.
Having military experience is political experience. Anyone who thinks that being a general isn’t political doesn’t understand the nature of the military, and besides, arguably the single most important responsibility of the Executive is to be the CiC. Andrew Jackson hated politics, particularly federal politics, but he did have at least some political experience. He was also a congressman, IIRC, so remove Andy from the list. Zack Taylor wasn’t political but was a military commander. Not necessarily prepped to grease the political wheels of congress but at least some understanding of bureaucracy, hierarchy, chain of command, and administration.
Herbert Hoover had political experience. He was Sec of Commerce. Before that he was involved in the US food administration. You can laugh at the experience but at least he had some understanding of governmental administration and how business gets done in the public sector.
Perhaps Chester A Arthur might qualify as the least qualified. Before becoming Vice President he was a state fees collector for the Port of New York. But even Chester had at least some public sector experience and understood that government ain’t business.
But what punctuates the uniqueness of Trump’s relative lack of qualifications is the fac that America in 2016 is not the America of 1845. Trump would absolutely, positively be the most ridiculously unqualified president in the history of America.
Well, it is in a general. In lower ranks, not so much, I should think. Sorry, Bo Gritz.
Zachary Taylor is probably the closest we’ve come. Unlike Eisenhower, his military postings were pretty focused on fighting battles rather than wider political concerns.
Eisenhower on the other hand, was not only Supreme Commander of the Allies, but also military governor of Germany for several months and the Army Chief of Staff for Truman’s first term, all of which probably involved as much or more politics and diplomacy than they did military strategy, etc.
Not a President, but IIRC, W. Willkie didn’t have any political experience when he ran against FDR, so Trump won’t be the first major party nominee from a purely private background.
Eisenhower was absolutely qualified to be president. I can’t say I’d vote for a Robert Gates or David Patraeus, but I’d definitely feel comfortable with their political competence and knowledge of national defense. Beyond that, despite their republican leanings in some areas, higher military brass tend to be along the lines of fiscally responsible and don’t necessarily deny global climate change. They know that a military machine needs to conserve resources, that national defense means nothing if the economy’s in the tank, and that climate has a lot to do with national security. And unlike the morons in congress, they don’t deny what science tells them. They’re not in a position to win battles with superstitions.