What life experiences or individual characteristics best prepare a person to conduct the job of POTUS?

Some one who knows what it is like to be homeless or suffer. Someone who is considerate and thoughtful and wants to truly help. Someone who has hit rock bottom at least once on his/her life.

Well that’s the problem “conduct the job of Potus” for the benefit of whom? Just whose President is Potus? Who owns him and the Congress? What are the chances of someone such as @talljasperman ‘s proposed candidate making it into the oval office? I suppose the best we can hope for is someone smart with some semblance of a conscience. After all, a certain level of intelligence is required just to appreciate that the common man in the country is getting the short end of the stick.

I think Ronald Reagan demonstrated that the POTUS has become a figurehead, who best serves his shadowy string-pullers by looking good, reading speeches well, doing what he’s told, and seeming respectable, trustworthy or likable to enough of the masses that they’re less likely to get uppity. And one who perpetuates the dramatic farce of American politics, distracting attention away from the fact that almost everyone in Congress, POTUS and SCOTUS are to one extent or another, ultimately pawns of corporations and the group of banks who own, control, or are allied with the holders of almost all the wealth on the planet.

The best president for the people, in theory, would be an invulnerable superman who can’t be bribed, tempted, assassinated, blackmailed, or manipulated, including by threatening anyone else, who could get elected and who would then not just be a pawn, and who would in fact eradicate the corrupt elements however he can. Ideally he’d be backed by an alien illuminati who could overpower all forms of the corrupt powers that be who would arise to destroy him.

Just about anything except being a professional politician! A good business man might be the best. Or a poor hardworking blue-collar person.

My favorite presidents had hardships and loss. Those who had privilege seem to be the worst.
I also prefer those who were intelligent, as opposed to those who got by on likability.

I think we, and our forefathers have gradually shaped a mold for POTUS, and though there is some trim and decoration allowed for the final assembly of that person, they must be primarily a product of that mold. That mold was forged in error, and should be reshaped.
Given that; are you asking what someone should be ideally, or in order to fit that mold?
Once upon a time, we were a new country. We needed a leader who seemed intelligent, strong, and wealthy; who could tell us who we were expected to be, now that we were Americans. He needed to be someone with a reputation for bravery and success.
Soon, we had a place in the world. Commerce being reliant on international trade, we needed a leader who could meet with foreign leaders and not offend them with ignorance to their customs. He needed to be charismatic, tough, and a real crafty horse trader.

All along, American society has had strongly defined roles for men, women, children, and social status. A man needed a college degree and a family if he wanted to be taken seriously as an adult and a professional.
Nowadays, I think a man who wants to be President should be a bachelor, and a workaholic. He should not cow to the whims of anyone, but be familiar with the concerns of everyone. He should not be military, because military functions with an entirely different mindset than civilians, but he should have a good understanding of military life, duties, concerns, etc., and good communication with those who can advise him (pardon) him/her in military matters. Maybe instead of man or woman, we should have a droid, like Data.
DATA IN 2016

A woman should not run until any children she has are grown. If a woman runs though, like men, it would be best if she had no family.

POTUS should agree to live on a minimum wage salary. When they leave office, their severance pay should be calculated according to their success while in office.
If anyone agreed to terms like that, it might reap better results than the attitude, “Damned if I do, and damned if I don’t” cultivated for them currently.
They should understand the laws of the country, though not necessarily be a lawyer. They should also have a good understanding of social and political values of other countries.
They should have a great poker face, but depth of soul.
Actually, I think the problem of finding someone right for the office is not so much what they bring to the table, but the unbelievable expectations of the public. Too much is placed on what isn’t important at all, forcing sometimes perfectly good leaders to shy away. Divorced should not be an issue. Religious belief should not be an issue. How well they drive a car should not be an issue. Our nation tends to pick at those things though.
People should stop that.
Let candidates present their plans, and ideas, and dreams for our country, and quit belaboring their choice of a fatty lunch.

Well, you did ask.

Contrary to what every candidate would have us believe, POTUS is not a dictatorship where they can do anything and everything they want. I wonder if anyone truly comprehends the nature of the job until they’re sitting in their Oval Office chair.

Given the ever-changing priorities determined by uncontrollable factors (world affairs, social unrest, weather crises, etc), having the ability to analyze. adapt, and act to address issues they’ve been handed would be a great asset.

Of course, some presidents were content to let their staff do most of their thinking for them.