Do you honestly believe that he is voting with the party line because he actually wants to do so? No...it's because he wants to be president. Hopefully if he does become the president, he'll go back to his old self.
That's the whole damn point though. You think it makes sense to elect a man to the highest office who was already willing to completely change how he ran the office he currently sits in just for a SHOT to be president? What the heck will happen 2010/2011 when he starts caring about reelection?
That's the whole damn point though. You think it makes sense to elect a man to the highest office who was already willing to completely change how he ran the office he currently sits in just for a SHOT to be president? What the heck will happen 2010/2011 when he starts caring about reelection?
Hasn't Obama changed positions quite a few times on quite a few topics though?
That's the whole damn point though. You think it makes sense to elect a man to the highest office who was already willing to completely change how he ran the office he currently sits in just for a SHOT to be president? What the heck will happen 2010/2011 when he starts caring about reelection?
Sure, sure...I don't disagree. That had nothing to do with my point, however.
Hasn't Obama changed positions quite a few times on quite a few topics though?
I don't know of anything he's truly change (in a binary yes/no way). I know he's altered some things, like HOW he would implement his healthcare plan, but that's what a mature politician does - take in criticism and modify ideas.
That's the whole damn point though. You think it makes sense to elect a man to the highest office who was already willing to completely change how he ran the office he currently sits in just for a SHOT to be president? What the heck will happen 2010/2011 when he starts caring about reelection?
Wait wait wait wait wait wait.
Are you honestly telling me that Obama has not changed positions to get elected? Are you kidding me?
Plus, hasn't McCain stated he would not run for reelection were he to win?
Because it's his argument. His ONLY argument. I personally find it stupid, but obviously a combination of his party affiliation and that argument have swayed millions of people to support him. He has now said "Haha, just kidding, a 40-something one-termer is totally experienced enough to be president."
At best (for McCain) it smacks of cheap politics, both going against his own earlier arguments and as a cheap play for Hillary voters. At worst it makes people reconsider voting for Obama, if they really were turned off by McCain convincing them he was inexperienced
no, that is not his only arguement he has many arguements on obama. From foriegn policy to economics. If you actually look at what obama is wanting to do and view it objectively you will start to question the man yourself.
actually i wasn't even going to vote for mccain i was looking at bob barr. however with this vp pick i think i might be changing my mind. Palin is a rock solid conservative which is what the party has been looking for a while. she isn't afraid to take her own party on either.
He didn't say she was experience to be president she is a vice president pick. She has been involved in local and state government longer than obama has.
Not really it doesn't. Obama is still inexperienced and running for the top job. So to say that doens't matter is not a very good arguement. more so just because mccain picked a vp who you think doesn't have it when she does.
she has spent more time making executive decisions than obama has. She has run everything from local government to state government and run it very well.
as someone else mention on another board. it was thursday that obama supposedly gave the speech of his life. since that time after this annoucement people have forgotten it and are talking about mccain and palin. that is bad for obama. the media attention is not on him right now but on this.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
You are wrong. She is a part of one term governor of an incredibly small state with no exposure let alone experience with many national issues.
I am wrong, or you disagree with me? 2 very different things.
I highly, highly doubt that this pick would have happened without the proper research and analysis put into what Palin can and can't do. McCain and his top aides seem to think she's fit for the job, and I'm willing to bet that the crew in charge of checking out each candidate isn't a bunch of drunk monkeys.
Your statement represents that you assume that all republicans are knuckle-dragging morons [which seems to be the vibe I get from a lot of your statements] who don't know anything.
Again, you are wrong. He has been behind in essentially every national poll for months and has been trailing Obama electorally since Obama got the nomination:
That map, right now, presents a pretty accurate picture for how the map will look November 4th. You probably give McCain Virginia, and then maybe Obama flips one more state (Ohio would be a coup, or maybe Montana or something) but that's about right.
My point was more along the lines of the fact that I feel as though McCain has nowhere to go but up. Hell, if you look a the map in the last 2 months McCain has stolen about 70 votes away. That'd be an up-trend.
In the end, though, that map is in enough different places that it can be hadly used to describe the current or future situations. Congrats to Obama for a paltry 25 vote lead 2 months before the election? Before any debates, the RNC?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Waiting patiently for MTGO Leagues to become a priority again. It's been 4 years :sick:.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
I am wrong, or you disagree with me? 2 very different things.
I highly, highly doubt that this pick would have happened without the proper research and analysis put into what Palin can and can't do. McCain and his top aides seem to think she's fit for the job, and I'm willing to bet that the crew in charge of checking out each candidate isn't a bunch of drunk monkeys.
Your statement represents that you assume that all republicans are knuckle-dragging morons [which seems to be the vibe I get from a lot of your statements] who don't know anything.
No I don't think Republicans are knuckle draggers and I'm not saying this pick wasn't researched. I'm saying it was a bad pick, which can happen even in the best researched areas. McCain is saying a 44 year old one term governor of Alaska is who, in his ideal world (since he's the one making the choice) would be president were he to be elected and die. That very much destroys the central theme of his campaign of wisdom through experience, and then there are the other things I've discussed ad nauseasm.
In the end, though, that map is in enough different places that it can be hadly used to describe the current or future situations. Congrats to Obama for a paltry 25 vote lead 2 months before the election? Before any debates, the RNC?
The margin has been that tight for a long time in presidential politics. Explain to me how McCain hopes to win electorally. There are essentially zero chances at a GOP pickup of a Blue-in-04 state (except MAYBE New Hampshire and it's 4 EVs). Then going the other way New Mexico and Iowa almost certainly going to turn blue, Nevada and Colorado are likely, and then any of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, hell even Indiana are within Obama's theoretical reach (for what it's worth I doubt he picks up anything off that leash, but that's a lot of ground from 04 McCain has to fight for just to maintain Dubya's narrow win, minus the 4 of NM/IA/NV/CO).
Dubya won 286-252 (one faithless elector so listed as 286-251, whatever). Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, and Iowa are 26 EVs, already reversing that margin of victory (a 'mandate' by Republicans own words, and Obama's current victory would be larger in popular vote terms). Then McCain has a host of, as I listed, 5-7 more states that had been within Bush's grasp to defend.
He didn't say she was experience to be president she is a vice president pick.
Which is a pick of who do I want to be president if I die.
She has been involved in local and state government longer than obama has.
No, she doesn't. She was a city councilwoman (clearly a lot of experience there applicable to being president of the United States) and mayor of a city of 9000 people from 1992-2002. She then made a failed run at Lt. Governor, sat on an Oil and Gas Commission, and has been governor for 2 years. Obama was a community organizer from 1992-1996 (similarly meaningless governmental experience, outside of learning how to organize and motivate people), a state legislator from 97-04, and then a US Senator.
as someone else mention on another board. it was thursday that obama supposedly gave the speech of his life. since that time after this annoucement people have forgotten it and are talking about mccain and palin. that is bad for obama. the media attention is not on him right now but on this.
... That's not an argument for Palin, that's an argument for the TIMING of McCain's announcement. As I said ages ago, ANY VP announcement would draw the media's attention from Obama AND did McCain really feel that worried about losing a news cycle or two to Obama when the RNC was 2 days away (which he knew would draw the media no matter what). He had two guaranteed media draws in ANY VP pick and his convention. Media attention on Palin is comprised often of debates like "Is she ready" and "Was she the right pick", not the stories you want the day after your selection. McCain would've been better served by Pawlenty, Romney, or even Jindal.
Lets see if major news outlets latch onto this compelling narrative.
That's a whole other kettle of fish. I love Daily Kos but I'll be the first to say they are quite liberal. If that story catches though, yikes. Especially yikes for Dems who could get screwed without ever getting involved if it turns out to not be true, as then Palin comes off like a victimized woman and gets sympathy.
John McCain was aiming to make history with his pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, and historians say he succeeded.
Presidential scholars say she appears to be the least experienced, least credentialed person to join a major-party ticket in the modern era.
So unconventional was McCain's choice that it left students of the presidency literally "stunned," in the words of Joel Goldstein, a St. Louis University law professor and scholar of the vice presidency. "Being governor of a small state for less than two years is not consistent with the normal criteria for determining who's of presidential caliber," said Goldstein.
"I think she is the most inexperienced person on a major party ticket in modern history," said presidential historian Matthew Dallek. [...]
"It would be one thing if she had only been governor for a year and a half, but prior to that she had not had major experience in public life," said Dallek of Palin. "The fact that he would have to go to somebody who is clearly unqualified to be president makes Obama look like an elder statesman."
Lets see if major news outlets latch onto this compelling narrative.
Lol.....the picture about halfway down makes it look like she has a party hat on.
It is worth mentioning that a lot of the stuff in that article has already been brought up in some shape or form, it's just the compilation of them.
Having them all together does have me raise an eyebrow, though.
I will admit this is the first time I've seen pictures of her allegedly being 7 months along and.....well.....she looks nothing of the sort. I've seen pregnant women and they start showing at about the halfway point, and a month after that it's the most obvious thing.
This will be fun to watch.
EDIT: It is worth noting that the information from that article doesn't link to reliable sources, and some of the more 'damning' info seems to be rather sensitive and wouldn't be given out to a random internet blogger. Really it is all just heavy speculation. Nothing is confirmed or anything of the sort.
sorry but a community organizer is not a political position. being on a city council is an elected position. obama didn't get started until 1997 she got started in 1992. there is a 5 year gap.
Each of her positions required her to make executive type decisions. not to mention she has been the owner of a small business among other things.
tell me what executive positions has obama held? 0 none.
She placed 2 out of 5 people for the LT governor job. that is pretty impressive if you ask me.
Being a senator for less than two years is not consistent with the normal criteria for determining who's of presidential caliber," said Goldstein
there i fixed it.
if you believe that bias piece of news well there is nothing to say about it really. i will wait till a legit news source publishes something.
as for showing it depends some women don't show. this is her 5th kid. sometime they do show sometimes they don't there have been plenty of women that it has been months before they found out they were pregnant. there have been teenagers hide their pregnancies from their parents and didn't show at all.
EDIT: It is worth noting that the information from that article doesn't link to reliable sources, and some of the more 'damning' info seems to be rather sensitive and wouldn't be given out to a random internet blogger. Really it is all just heavy speculation. Nothing is confirmed or anything of the sort.
excatly. only time will tell at this point. More so there is no way they can get the actual information even if they wanted to. medical information like that is protected. the only public information would be what is filed on the birth certificate. which will have her down as the mom.
however some people will latch onto anything. yet they ignore all the crap that obama has been involved with from flagger to rezko to ayers to his preacher. none of that matters at all.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Hmm ... I'm somewhat skeptical. I'm going to wait to pass judgment until more proof can be uncovered, but on principle I find digging up dirt on people's private lives distasteful. If this story is true, though, I would consider it fairly damning. The web of lies she may have created (as well as the potential abuse of power) to hide something so relatively innocuous would speak poorly on her character. I understand that Mrs. Palin is a woman with conservative viewpoints, but going to such lengths to deny that her grandson exists is just ... bizarre. If it's true it will turn this election into even more of a farce then it's already become.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Xantcha, Phyrexian Reject Jodah, Archmage Eternal Tovolar, Howlpack Alpha Pivlic, Orzhov Informant Crixizix, Master Engineer Feather, Boros Peacekeeper Marisi Coilbreaker O-Kagachi Gix, Phyrexian Praetor Karn, Father of Machines Yawgmoth, Father of Machines
Serra, Mother of All Angels Tevesh Szat, Doom of Fools Leshrac the Nightwalker Jeska, the Thrice-Touched Elspeth Returned Crucius the Mad Taysir the Infinite Urza's Head (Unglued!)
sorry but a community organizer is not a political position. being on a city council is an elected position. obama didn't get started until 1997 she got started in 1992. there is a 5 year gap.
Each of her positions required her to make executive type decisions. not to mention she has been the owner of a small business among other things.
tell me what executive positions has obama held? 0 none.
If you can claim co ownership of business as legitimate executive experience, then Obama can claim community organize as executive experience as well. But beyond that, executive experience does not qualify you for president. As has been said before, Bush had executive experience, and we all see how well that turned out.
As has been said before, Bush had executive experience, and we all see how well that turned out.
I don't think there's any point ever of discussing Bush. All but 8% of Americans understand that Bush screwed everything up and no one likes him. No sense in using someone accepted by all as a failure as an example. Statistics would refer to him as an outlier, which are very often excluded from analysis.
I do understand your point that executive experience doesn't always directly transfer to presidential results, but we won't know until someone takes office.
It's a basic economics approach. All else equal, would you prefer the candidate with more executive experience, or the one with less?
I ask this to everyone who says executive experience means nil.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Waiting patiently for MTGO Leagues to become a priority again. It's been 4 years :sick:.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
Not to mention I specifically said being a community organizer was as meaningless towards the presidency as being a city councilwoman.
The only positions with any relevancy towards the presidency (I realized I forgot a couple in my earlier list) are:
1. High level general - Familiar with the executive execution of military tasks
2. Large state governor - Not a perfect corrolary, but executive tasks from a broad base of issues, regions, and constituents
3. Diplomat - Duh, president is our largest diplomat
4. Executive branch secretary - Again not perfect, but being Secretary of Energy (to use Richardson as an example) would give you useful experience in the execution of policy on that issue (this would be very specific experience though).
I don't think there's any point ever of discussing Bush. All but 8% of Americans understand that Bush screwed everything up and no one likes him. No sense in using someone accepted by all as a failure as an example. Statistics would refer to him as an outlier, which are very often excluded from analysis.
I do understand your point that executive experience doesn't always directly transfer to presidential results, but we won't know until someone takes office.
It's a basic economics approach. All else equal, would you prefer the candidate with more executive experience, or the one with less?
I ask this to everyone who says executive experience means nil.
Judgement >> Experience
I would rather have a candidate with whom I agree than a candidate with a VP who was governor of Alaska for 2 years (but keep in mind himself as just as little executive experience of any kind).
I'd rather have a candidate who understood that waging a war against a country that did nothing to us with little plan was probably not a good idea.
That being said, having experience does not necessarily make one the best candidate, there are so many variables involved in ruling a country.
@Penguinguru917 : On the contrary, the Bush argument is very important. It shows the flaw of McCain's "More experience = better qualification for president" platform. Having watched his father rule the country before, Bush has had a unique perspective of the Oval Office that very few past president had wich prepared him for what to come. I don't think I need to remind anyone of the result. Heck Bush made a deep mark in history that people will not forget anytime soon.
It is undeniable that McCain has much more experience than Obama, and even if his VP is some broad he found in the snow, it does not diminish that. But so far, I find his experience truly is his most relevant qualification for office, wich is most likely why his camcpaign is trying to make Americans focus on it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It is always easy to be tolerant and understanding...Until someone presents an opinion completely opposite to your own.
Vice president (behind somebody who actually has a fair chance of kicking the bucket int he next few years no less).
AT THE SAME TIME
...I may have already posted this in this thread, but whatevs. IT BEARS REPEATING.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Everything is true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true, false, and meaningless in some sense. Repeat this 666 times and you will reach enlightenment.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
Bush not worth mentioning? That supposed maverick named McCain has a voting record 95% in line with Bush.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Everything is true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true, false, and meaningless in some sense. Repeat this 666 times and you will reach enlightenment.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
Bush not worth mentioning? That supposed maverick named McCain has a voting record 95% in line with Bush.
Thanks for spouting a useless statistic. How many of those votes were on major policy issues, as opposed to the much more common day-to-day voting on exceedingly minor things?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
EDH: UBGThe MimeoplasmUBG
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That's the whole damn point though. You think it makes sense to elect a man to the highest office who was already willing to completely change how he ran the office he currently sits in just for a SHOT to be president? What the heck will happen 2010/2011 when he starts caring about reelection?
Hasn't Obama changed positions quite a few times on quite a few topics though?
Thanks to the [Æther] shop for the sig!
Sure, sure...I don't disagree. That had nothing to do with my point, however.
I don't know of anything he's truly change (in a binary yes/no way). I know he's altered some things, like HOW he would implement his healthcare plan, but that's what a mature politician does - take in criticism and modify ideas.
Wait wait wait wait wait wait.
Are you honestly telling me that Obama has not changed positions to get elected? Are you kidding me?
Plus, hasn't McCain stated he would not run for reelection were he to win?
He's certainly preened himself, of course. But name me anything as wanton as the change McCain has gone through the past 8 years.
Really? That's news to me. And doesn't change the fact that I don't want someone that quick to give in to his party in office.
no, that is not his only arguement he has many arguements on obama. From foriegn policy to economics. If you actually look at what obama is wanting to do and view it objectively you will start to question the man yourself.
actually i wasn't even going to vote for mccain i was looking at bob barr. however with this vp pick i think i might be changing my mind. Palin is a rock solid conservative which is what the party has been looking for a while. she isn't afraid to take her own party on either.
He didn't say she was experience to be president she is a vice president pick. She has been involved in local and state government longer than obama has.
Not really it doesn't. Obama is still inexperienced and running for the top job. So to say that doens't matter is not a very good arguement. more so just because mccain picked a vp who you think doesn't have it when she does.
she has spent more time making executive decisions than obama has. She has run everything from local government to state government and run it very well.
as someone else mention on another board. it was thursday that obama supposedly gave the speech of his life. since that time after this annoucement people have forgotten it and are talking about mccain and palin. that is bad for obama. the media attention is not on him right now but on this.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I am wrong, or you disagree with me? 2 very different things.
I highly, highly doubt that this pick would have happened without the proper research and analysis put into what Palin can and can't do. McCain and his top aides seem to think she's fit for the job, and I'm willing to bet that the crew in charge of checking out each candidate isn't a bunch of drunk monkeys.
Your statement represents that you assume that all republicans are knuckle-dragging morons [which seems to be the vibe I get from a lot of your statements] who don't know anything.
My point was more along the lines of the fact that I feel as though McCain has nowhere to go but up. Hell, if you look a the map in the last 2 months McCain has stolen about 70 votes away. That'd be an up-trend.
In the end, though, that map is in enough different places that it can be hadly used to describe the current or future situations. Congrats to Obama for a paltry 25 vote lead 2 months before the election? Before any debates, the RNC?
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
No I don't think Republicans are knuckle draggers and I'm not saying this pick wasn't researched. I'm saying it was a bad pick, which can happen even in the best researched areas. McCain is saying a 44 year old one term governor of Alaska is who, in his ideal world (since he's the one making the choice) would be president were he to be elected and die. That very much destroys the central theme of his campaign of wisdom through experience, and then there are the other things I've discussed ad nauseasm.
The margin has been that tight for a long time in presidential politics. Explain to me how McCain hopes to win electorally. There are essentially zero chances at a GOP pickup of a Blue-in-04 state (except MAYBE New Hampshire and it's 4 EVs). Then going the other way New Mexico and Iowa almost certainly going to turn blue, Nevada and Colorado are likely, and then any of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, hell even Indiana are within Obama's theoretical reach (for what it's worth I doubt he picks up anything off that leash, but that's a lot of ground from 04 McCain has to fight for just to maintain Dubya's narrow win, minus the 4 of NM/IA/NV/CO).
Dubya won 286-252 (one faithless elector so listed as 286-251, whatever). Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, and Iowa are 26 EVs, already reversing that margin of victory (a 'mandate' by Republicans own words, and Obama's current victory would be larger in popular vote terms). Then McCain has a host of, as I listed, 5-7 more states that had been within Bush's grasp to defend.
Which is a pick of who do I want to be president if I die.
No, she doesn't. She was a city councilwoman (clearly a lot of experience there applicable to being president of the United States) and mayor of a city of 9000 people from 1992-2002. She then made a failed run at Lt. Governor, sat on an Oil and Gas Commission, and has been governor for 2 years. Obama was a community organizer from 1992-1996 (similarly meaningless governmental experience, outside of learning how to organize and motivate people), a state legislator from 97-04, and then a US Senator.
... That's not an argument for Palin, that's an argument for the TIMING of McCain's announcement. As I said ages ago, ANY VP announcement would draw the media's attention from Obama AND did McCain really feel that worried about losing a news cycle or two to Obama when the RNC was 2 days away (which he knew would draw the media no matter what). He had two guaranteed media draws in ANY VP pick and his convention. Media attention on Palin is comprised often of debates like "Is she ready" and "Was she the right pick", not the stories you want the day after your selection. McCain would've been better served by Pawlenty, Romney, or even Jindal.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223
Lets see if major news outlets latch onto this compelling narrative.
Twitter
That's a whole other kettle of fish. I love Daily Kos but I'll be the first to say they are quite liberal. If that story catches though, yikes. Especially yikes for Dems who could get screwed without ever getting involved if it turns out to not be true, as then Palin comes off like a victimized woman and gets sympathy.
Lol.....the picture about halfway down makes it look like she has a party hat on.
It is worth mentioning that a lot of the stuff in that article has already been brought up in some shape or form, it's just the compilation of them.
Having them all together does have me raise an eyebrow, though.
I will admit this is the first time I've seen pictures of her allegedly being 7 months along and.....well.....she looks nothing of the sort. I've seen pregnant women and they start showing at about the halfway point, and a month after that it's the most obvious thing.
This will be fun to watch.
EDIT: It is worth noting that the information from that article doesn't link to reliable sources, and some of the more 'damning' info seems to be rather sensitive and wouldn't be given out to a random internet blogger. Really it is all just heavy speculation. Nothing is confirmed or anything of the sort.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
Each of her positions required her to make executive type decisions. not to mention she has been the owner of a small business among other things.
tell me what executive positions has obama held? 0 none.
She placed 2 out of 5 people for the LT governor job. that is pretty impressive if you ask me.
there i fixed it.
if you believe that bias piece of news well there is nothing to say about it really. i will wait till a legit news source publishes something.
as for showing it depends some women don't show. this is her 5th kid. sometime they do show sometimes they don't there have been plenty of women that it has been months before they found out they were pregnant. there have been teenagers hide their pregnancies from their parents and didn't show at all.
excatly. only time will tell at this point. More so there is no way they can get the actual information even if they wanted to. medical information like that is protected. the only public information would be what is filed on the birth certificate. which will have her down as the mom.
however some people will latch onto anything. yet they ignore all the crap that obama has been involved with from flagger to rezko to ayers to his preacher. none of that matters at all.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
If you can claim co ownership of business as legitimate executive experience, then Obama can claim community organize as executive experience as well. But beyond that, executive experience does not qualify you for president. As has been said before, Bush had executive experience, and we all see how well that turned out.
I don't think there's any point ever of discussing Bush. All but 8% of Americans understand that Bush screwed everything up and no one likes him. No sense in using someone accepted by all as a failure as an example. Statistics would refer to him as an outlier, which are very often excluded from analysis.
I do understand your point that executive experience doesn't always directly transfer to presidential results, but we won't know until someone takes office.
It's a basic economics approach. All else equal, would you prefer the candidate with more executive experience, or the one with less?
I ask this to everyone who says executive experience means nil.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
The only positions with any relevancy towards the presidency (I realized I forgot a couple in my earlier list) are:
1. High level general - Familiar with the executive execution of military tasks
2. Large state governor - Not a perfect corrolary, but executive tasks from a broad base of issues, regions, and constituents
3. Diplomat - Duh, president is our largest diplomat
4. Executive branch secretary - Again not perfect, but being Secretary of Energy (to use Richardson as an example) would give you useful experience in the execution of policy on that issue (this would be very specific experience though).
Judgement >> Experience
I would rather have a candidate with whom I agree than a candidate with a VP who was governor of Alaska for 2 years (but keep in mind himself as just as little executive experience of any kind).
I'd rather have a candidate who understood that waging a war against a country that did nothing to us with little plan was probably not a good idea.
Lack of experience = Flawed judgement.
That being said, having experience does not necessarily make one the best candidate, there are so many variables involved in ruling a country.
@Penguinguru917 : On the contrary, the Bush argument is very important. It shows the flaw of McCain's "More experience = better qualification for president" platform. Having watched his father rule the country before, Bush has had a unique perspective of the Oval Office that very few past president had wich prepared him for what to come. I don't think I need to remind anyone of the result. Heck Bush made a deep mark in history that people will not forget anytime soon.
It is undeniable that McCain has much more experience than Obama, and even if his VP is some broad he found in the snow, it does not diminish that. But so far, I find his experience truly is his most relevant qualification for office, wich is most likely why his camcpaign is trying to make Americans focus on it.
Creationism in schools.
Vice president (behind somebody who actually has a fair chance of kicking the bucket int he next few years no less).
AT THE SAME TIME
...I may have already posted this in this thread, but whatevs. IT BEARS REPEATING.
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
Can you please link your source on this? I don't think approval polls work this way.
I'm sick and tired of pointless Bush bashing. It's become "cool", and people are making unfounded attacks on him right and left.
Was he a perfect president? No. Did he screw everything up? Of course not.
EDH:
UBGThe MimeoplasmUBG
In some sense. The only good fnord is a dead fnord.
Thanks for spouting a useless statistic. How many of those votes were on major policy issues, as opposed to the much more common day-to-day voting on exceedingly minor things?
EDH:
UBGThe MimeoplasmUBG