Is it possible for a poor man to become President/PrimeMinister in your country thus making the term Democracy in its truest sense or is it limited to only those who have money?

Definitely only for those who have the money and the 'right' contacts unfortunately.

Only in theory. In practice you need to know the right people to help you on your way. Unfortunately "democracy" in its true acception is very rarely found.

Whether it`s possible or not is a moot point for me,I simply wouldn`t vote for a poor man myself. A man that hasn`t been able to make a financial success of his own business life is hardly the type I would like to be the leader of my country.

I suppose most Americans would cite Abraham Lincoln as a prime example of that it can happen. A few holes in that, though. Never mind that Abe grew up poor (I think he was amongst the majority of his peers for the most part, at the time and at the place, that way, though). As a young man he was prominent in his region, successful and respected. It's alleged that he was also more than a little manic/depressive, wobbled into a marriage that, if nothing else, made his domestic fires burn about as warm as the "fires of Hell" (but he married "up", socially, so it all seemed sensible). Some say he was certifiably bisexual, probably as appealing to the eye as one of those apple-throwing trees from "The Wizard of Oz", more than a little antisocial. Poor Abe! Under the scrutiny of today's venues, he'd have never lasted a week! And, of course, he was alive a whole 200 years ago - and things have changed A LOT since then. So he doesn't count as a good barometer for anything that is in place today. Even the "honest" label seems remote, even naive.

I think the label of being "poor", as a child or as a family, helps in terms of getting elected to things in the US, though. It makes for bang-up speeches and appeals to the Average Joe (Jimmy Carter would be a good example of this but, in my opinion, the presentation of poverty far outweighed the truth as to whether or not it was really a valid label in his direction). And, as such, we almost all agree that he was/is a spectacular human being ... but not such a hot 'democratic leader'. The 'poor as a churchmouse' business was a large factor in getting him elected. But money and backers and an ambitious political machine got his tractor rolling (so to speak) to begin with. Without that, said tractor would more than likely still be satisfied rolling around in a Georgia peanut farm. Money didn't make him any more or less a humane and benevolent soul. Money didn't make him any more or less an effective leader, either. But cash got him elected for sure.

Today, I'm hearing that mega-zillionaire (or whatever) social icon Oprah Winfrey holds Senator Barack Obama's bid for the Democratic party's presidentioal nominaion in her Midas-like little hands. Her "endorsement" (AKA that and the financial backing that comes with it, from ALL directions) seems key to deciding who to pick between Mr. Obama and Hillary Clinton, for the public. Peculiar that the process of power now [supposedly] rests in the lap of a talk show host. Personally, I can't see anyone trying to decide between those two candidates having a problem picking one or the other. Is it possible to be torn between them? They're so different (and both so capable in an east vs. west kind of way). But, hola!, the decision will come with the purse strings of Winfrey. It'll all come down to whom she "approves" of better, thus who we see on TV more as the election builds.

So (whew), after all that, I'd say that in America a poor man or woman can be a terrific leader. A bastion of credibility, conscience and freedom. Can he or she get elected without a few million bucks (be it from talk show hosts or Texas ranchers)? Nope. Can't happen. Not anymore.

Yes, I believe that as long as you're intelligent enough it is possible for anyone to become prime minister in the Netherlands. We don't vote directly for the prime minister, but s/he is elected by the house of representatives, so no national campaigns are involved. "All you need to do is join a political party, start at city council level, and work your way upward from there.

However, I doubt that someone that makes it to prime minister will be poor. They might have started out that way but by the time they've climbed the ladder, they'll have earned money. (Hmm, this depends on the definition of 'poor' I guess. Let's say they'll have earned a regular salary but not millions or anything.)

We only started having a ministerial government a couple of years ago and the Chief Minister's post was hotly contested by two people, a multi-millionaire and a former carpenter who had no money othe than his salary as a politician. It was fairly close but the millionaire won, but he won on merit not because he had any money.

The other person became the Health Minister and actually got the sack today. I never could stand the man so am delighted to see his downfall. Yes, I am vindictive, it is partially down to him that I lost my job as he made cuts to the grant given to my former employer, they had to cut costs so bye bye Sue. Even before that I loathed the nasty little man.

Quite a few of our local politicians are purely in it for the money, it is a well paid job.

Mochyn, you say president or prime/chief minister but perhaps it can be extended to encompass all politicians.

Until relatively recently all politicians in this island were volunteers, they had to be elected of course but received no salary. The vast majority of politicians tended to be lawyers, accountants and successful businessmen and a sprinkle of farmers. These people had been successful in their professions/businesses and could afford to give something back to the community. The very fact that they had been successful meant we had a government of intelligent people.

Then they introduced generous expenses and some people thought that it might be easy money so entered politics. Next came the salaries and heaven help us, a whole new breed of politicians, those in it for the money.

It was possible to earn far more as a politician than in the jobs for which these people had been trained, for example a carpenter - our former Health Minister. Now I have absolutely nothing against carpenters but how on earth can a man who left school at sixteen and worked with his hands expect to run a huge department like Health?

Since salaries were introduced we have no lawyers, just one retired accountant and one retired (but wealthy) businessman. What we have is a shower of people who think this is money for jam, it is a shambles.

Politicians with money is not always bad, for us it was good. By the way, the wealthy ex-businessman is our Chief Minister. He ran a large (for Jersey) group of companies then sold it for a number of millions.