Who has more executive eperience?

[Chuck S]

So? You're also voting for a Presidential Candidate with no experience, if you judge experience by being governor, as this threads poll does. Again, why did the Republicans not nominate their best & most experienced person from the primaries to be President?

Huckabee has been a Governor for 11 years. Aren't you terribly disappointed that your Party nominated a Presidential Candidate with inferior experience?

Even Romney has gubernatorial experience...instead you went with the totally unexperienced (by your defintition of experience) candidate.

 

[pr surfer]

It is a very valid comparision.

So you'd go to a doctor with the best record (aka experience), but you wouldn't apply that same criteria to making a decision on who has the best record (aka experience) in running a country??

It is an invalid comparison, and here is why:

A doctor's record is completely objective. Their records are not subject to interpretation. A doctor is either good or not. No one can argue on whether or not a patient was cured, lived, or died. There is no gray area.

A politicians record is subjective. Their records are subject to interpretation from the public. What appeals to one voter does not necessarily appeal to another voter, and whether or not they were right or wrong in how they voted is subject to interpretation.

 

[rayelias]

So? You're also voting for a Presidential Candidate with no experience, if you judge experience by being governor, as this threads poll does.

Aren't you terribly disappointed that your Party nominated a Presidential Candidate with inferior experience?

So, are you finally admitting that Obama is not experienced enough to be president? Or is it because Palin is a woman?

I think I need to put on my waders. It's getting deep in here.

 

[mickeysgal]

It is an invalid comparison, and here is why:

A doctor's record is completely objective. Their records are not subject to interpretation. A doctor is either good or not. No one can argue on whether or not a patient was cured, lived, or died. There is no gray area.

A politicians record is subjective. Their records are subject to interpretation from the public. What appeals to one voter does not necessarily appeal to another voter, and whether or not they were right or wrong in how they voted is subject to interpretation.

At the end of the day, I'll take a doctor that has at least had performed the operation for a couple of years, lets say, than than one that has never operated before but rather just simply talked about performing one. Big difference. Experience is concrete, not subjective.

 

[pr surfer]

At the end of the day, I'll take a doctor that has at least had performed the operation for a couple of years, lets say, than than one that has never operated before but rather just simply talked about performing one.

Agreed. I would take the same doctor as you.

Experience is concrete, not subjective.

As far as a doctor goes, absolutely.

But for the POTUS, there are more factors to consider than just experience. So allow me to state this as clearly as possible: I AM VOTING FOR SENATOR BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND SENATOR JOSEPH BIDEN FOR THE VICE PRESIDENCY.

 

[Chuck S]

So, are you finally admitting that Obama is not experienced enough to be president? Or is it because Palin is a woman?

I think I need to put on my waders. It's getting deep in here.

Actually, if I believed, as Republicans are trying to assert, that being a governor is a prerequiste or adds experience that is valuable to being a President, then perhaps. But again, it is the Republicans that seem to be promoting that Philosophy..therefore, it should apply to their candiate, not the opposition.

However, as most Democrats don't believe that being a governor makes one a more viable President, then we are quite happy with our nomination. As far as Palin being a woman, I supported Hillary, not Barack, and was a delegate for Hillary at our county convention. I vote issues, not gender...but since you even brought it up, I guess gender does make a difference to you.

 

[mickeysgal]

But for the POTUS, there are more factors to consider than just experience. So allow me to state this as clearly as possible: I AM VOTING FOR SENATOR BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND SENATOR JOSEPH BIDEN FOR THE VICE PRESIDENCY.

I never thought there was a doubt otherwise.

 

[pr surfer]

I never thought there was a doubt otherwise.

Excellent I didn't know if I was clear enough

 

[mickeysgal]

Excellent I didn't know if I was clear enough

psst...your signature gave it away.

 

[pr surfer]

psst...your signature gave it away.

Awwwe.. and I thought I was being subtle

 

[DawnCt1]

FDR

You got me there!

 

[loco4dis]

OK, I'm laughing at the this part, since you are using it to refer to Bush: They are the men who didn't seek greatness, but upon whom greatness was thrust.

Yeah, I knew that would make the dems on here laugh, but I'll get the last laugh just like all of us Reagan supporters have. History will be good to Bush.

 

[duckfan78]

Mr. Obama served 8 years as a State Senator in a highly populated state (Illinois). He has been a US Senator since 2005. That is over 10 years of significant political experience.

Ms. Palin has spent less than two years as the governor of one of the least populated states in the union. (The entire state of Alaska has 1/4 the population of the city of Chicago.) Prior to that she was mayor of a town with a population less than 10,000.

How on earth can anyone think Ms. Palin has more experience than Mr. Obama? Spin it all you want, but the facts remain.

Mary

your spinning it that a community organizer, and a senator who has spent his time in the senate running for president, has more experience than the top executive of a state which is a very responsible position since it is the state with the most energy production in the union.

 

[duckfan78]

Then to answer the "who has more executive experience question", on the Republican side, John Hovern of North Dakota should be the Presidential Nominee, with Rick Perry of TX as VP, right? Assuming they are looking for the candidates with the most executive experience as Governor. So then the question, if the poll has any merit, is why are the Republicans running a Presidential ticket with a President that has "no executive experience" and a VP with only nominal experience? I mean, if we are to draw a conclusion, as implied as the purpose of the poll, that "executive experience" equals qualification for President, it is the logical extrapolation

The choices were between Obama or Palin, please keep it between them. Thanks

 

[corndog]

your spinning it that a community organizer, and a senator who has spent his time in the senate running for president, has more experience than the top executive of a state which is a very responsible position since it is the state with the most energy production in the union.

I actually heard a very prominent Democratic today on one of the cable shows say the biggest reason that Obama is qualified to be president is that he's been running for president for 3 years. This was meant to be a selling point.

 

[duckfan78]

Actually McCain is not nearly as liberal in his views as he was 4 years ago. I would have voted for him then. His views and promises have been driven by the extreme right of the party for this election, and his VP choice illustrates that...no way could I vote for him now. His past record is no longer relevant, unfortunately. He is merely a puppet on a string, now.

I really think this is true of both parties. The candidates are not the ones calling the shots at all. It's the party big wigs. They really don't care who the candidate is, as long as their party wins. The individual faces don't matter, they are just there to fill out the suit.

My decision to vote Obama isn't because I like him, or think he is the best my party has to offer. The big prize here is the Supreme Court, Roe V Wade, gay rights, privacy rights all are at stake, and have nothing to do with the respective Presidential candidates, only the overall political philosophy.

Over the past 25 years, when has the supreme court over turned roe v wade? even during Reagan, GHWB and GWB, which all three were very strongly pro-life.

 

[loco4dis]

I actually heard a very prominent Democratic today on one of the cable shows say the biggest reason that Obama is qualified to be president is that he's been running for president for 3 years. This was meant to be a selling point.

I heard several pundits say that. They said "why does anyone think of Obama as qualified?" And their answer was "because we've been watching him run for president for 3 years. His campaign has convinced us he's qualified." And, yes, it was democrats saying this. I guess that makes him a chief executive officer of running for president.

 

[rayelias]

I actually heard a very prominent Democratic today on one of the cable shows say the biggest reason that Obama is qualified to be president is that he's been running for president for 3 years. This was meant to be a selling point.

I heard several pundits say that. They said "why does anyone think of Obama as qualified?" And their answer was "because we've been watching him run for president for 3 years. His campaign has convinced us he's qualified." And, yes, it was democrats saying this. I guess that makes him a chief executive officer of running for president.

By that logic, we're all screwed. President Lyndon LaRouche. (Although I'd bet a lot of the OS would LOVE to see that. As a matter of fact, the Obama campaign and his minions sound remarkably similar to LaRouche.)

 

[duckfan78]

So much for Diplomacy being a qualification for President, huh? No wonder we have senseless war to deal with.

You know what. Since we have been talking about Abe Lincoln, he too got us involved in a sensless war. he could have let the south leave and just take the passive approach. Instead, over 600,000 american's lost their lives.

Lincoln could have just said no and all those lives would have been saved right?

The Iraq war is not useless. And it is won.

 

[DawnCt1]

By that logic, we're all screwed. President Lyndon LaRouche. (Although I'd bet a lot of the OS would LOVE to see that. As a matter of fact, the Obama campaign and his minions sound remarkably similar to LaRouche.)

Lets not forget Ralph Nader. Is there an election that he hasn't been running in?