| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:57 am Post subject: The importance of experience |
 |
|
I thought this was a really good op-ed by nicholas kristoff on experience:
Hillary, Barack, Experience
| Quote: |
With all the sniping from the Clinton camp about whether Barack Obama has enough experience to make a strong president, consider another presidential candidate who was far more of a novice. He had the gall to run for president even though he had served a single undistinguished term in the House of Representatives, before being hounded back to his district.
That was Abraham Lincoln. |
| Quote: |
Looking at the 19 presidents since 1900, three of the greatest were among those with the fewest years in electoral politics. Teddy Roosevelt had been a governor for two years and vice president for six months; Woodrow Wilson, a governor for just two years; and Franklin Roosevelt, a governor for four years. None ever served in Congress.
They all did have executive experience (as did Mr. Clinton), actually running something larger than a Senate office. Maybe that�s something voters should think about more: governors have often made better presidents than senators. But that�s not a good Democratic talking point, because the candidates with the greatest administrative experience by far are Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Czarjorge
Joined: 01 May 2007
Location: I now have the same moustache, and it is glorious.
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks, bummer. That was an interesting article. I forwarded it on to my sister who has become a raging Clintonista. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Czarjorge wrote: |
| Thanks, bummer. That was an interesting article. I forwarded it on to my sister who has become a raging Clintonista. |
Thankfully I haven't run across any around here. One or two raging obama fans but that's about it. And i don't mind them since they just hype Obama and don't disparage any of the other candidates. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BB,
Interesting article, too bad it won't silence the Clinton crowd with their rants about Obama having too little experience. The sad fact is being first lady of Arkansas and of the US is not experience getting things done. If you go by that standard, Clinton has 7 years in the US Senate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Teddy Roosevelt had been a governor for two years and vice president for six months; Woodrow Wilson, a governor for just two years; and Franklin Roosevelt, a governor for four years. None ever served in Congress. |
I don't see how this helps Obama at all. Obama doesn't have any of the Executive experience that these guys had. All this does is show that Clinton has not had any Executive experience, despite her touting of experience.
Kristoff has a wierd analysis. There's also his assumption that these are our three greatest Presidents. I'd beg to disagree with him. Of these three, only TR would make my top 10 Presidents list. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| only TR would make my top 10 Presidents list |
OK. Let's hear your defence of Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan for your Top 10 list. I dare you. No, I double dog dare you. Or is it Benjamin Harrison and Chester A. Arthur? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| only TR would make my top 10 Presidents list |
OK. Let's hear your defence of Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan for your Top 10 list. I dare you. No, I double dog dare you. Or is it Benjamin Harrison and Chester A. Arthur? |
Alright, alright, I'd put 1942 FDR on the list, but not 1930 FDR. He was President so damned long, that it gave him experience.
Woodrow is simply not going to make it on that list. I'd put Truman and Eisenhower on there first, and even Reagan before Woodrow. Yeah, you heard me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Teddy Roosevelt had been a governor for two years and vice president for six months; Woodrow Wilson, a governor for just two years; and Franklin Roosevelt, a governor for four years. None ever served in Congress. |
I don't see how this helps Obama at all. Obama doesn't have any of the Executive experience that these guys had. All this does is show that Clinton has not had any Executive experience, despite her touting of experience.
Kristoff has a wierd analysis. There's also his assumption that these are our three greatest Presidents. I'd beg to disagree with him. Of these three, only TR would make my top 10 Presidents list. |
It doesn't help Obama. It was just pointing out the overemphasis on "experience". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jkelly80
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Teddy Roosevelt had been a governor for two years and vice president for six months; Woodrow Wilson, a governor for just two years; and Franklin Roosevelt, a governor for four years. None ever served in Congress. |
I don't see how this helps Obama at all. Obama doesn't have any of the Executive experience that these guys had. All this does is show that Clinton has not had any Executive experience, despite her touting of experience.
Kristoff has a wierd analysis. There's also his assumption that these are our three greatest Presidents. I'd beg to disagree with him. Of these three, only TR would make my top 10 Presidents list. |
It doesn't help Obama. It was just pointing out the overemphasis on "experience". |
Quite overemphasized. Sometimes I think "experience" is code for "being able to grease the wheels based on which powerful congresspersons and bureaucrats like you". Because everything else is management theory, emphasis on the theory. Sure it would probably help being a governor or mayor, but a city council is not the senate, nor is a state senate the joint chiefs of staff.
I just realized that Obama ran for Congress in my district in 2000, but he lost to ex black panther Bobby Rush. I didn't vote in that one though. Not relevant, but I'm pretty stoked about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Experience is one of a constellation of factors to be considered when choosing a candidate. It's a very important one. So is judgement. So are education and policy goals.
Electing anyone to the presidency is a crap-shoot. Some people turn out not to be up to the job. Other people grow into the job after they get it. However, I do believe that the more experience in executive positions a person has, the less risk the public runs when electing that person. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
