comment: >
  
  When you phrase it as "celebrities should run" all we know about them is that they are celebrity.  Unless you'd also say "plumbers should run" or "teachers should run" because...well....there is absolutely no connection between being a celebrity (or a plumber or a teacher) and being able to be an effective legislator.  
  So...you'd be better to say that being celebrity should not disqualify you from running, but it's not sufficient.  You yourself go on to say that they need to be smart enough to hire good advisors and listen to them.  If the plumber is also that then the only advantage the celebrity has is capacity to win the election because of recognition.  That's not a meaningful difference and we all implicitly suspect that the unknown plumber who is smart enough and can hire good advisors would lose to the celebrity who lacks those qualifications.  
  The cons are that "celebrity" creates electability in the absence of actual qualifications.  Anyone without qualifications should not be elected to office.
context: /u/Square-Dragonfruit76 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
  All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
  Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
  ^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards