143 days...what's your take?

[Lena Brandenburg]

I'm not even certain if I should post this, as this subforum seems to be leaning quite left...but I can't help but get some other opinions on this matter...it certainly provides food for thought on Obama's experience...what do you think about it?

You couldn't get a job at McDonalds and become district manager after 143 days of experience.

You couldn't become chief of surgery after 143 days of experience of being a surgeon.

You couldn't get a job as a teacher and be the superintendent after 143 days of experience.

You couldn't join the military and become a colonel after 143 days of experience.

You couldn't get a job as a reporter and become the nightly news anchor after 143 days of experience.


BUT....

'From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United States Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That's how many days the Senate was actually in session and working. After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World .... 143 days.

We all have to start somewhere. The senate is a good start,but after 143 days, that's all it is - a start.

AND, strangely, a large sector of the American public is okay with this and campaigning for him. We wouldn't accept this in our own line of work, yet some are okay with this for the President of the United States of America ! Come on folks, we are not voting for the next American Idol!


My take on it? Well consider the source...of course I will take anything I read with a grain of salt...but honestly, even if we count non-working days in the senate...the point is he's highly inexperienced. :shrug It's funny because lots of people are comparing his inexperience to Palin's. Well that's comparing apples to oranges, not apples to apples. I'm fascinated to learn what you ladies think about this. :)

[Scorpiosue1102]

I guess I don't understand why 7 years as an Illinois state senate is thrown out of the equation.:shrug

[strangejen]

Well that's comparing apples to oranges, not apples to apples.

umm . . . why?

[Tiffikat]

I swear I've gotten to the point I almost want to stop reading this forum. *sigh*

[Lena Brandenburg]

apples to apples = compare the experience of the presidential candidates or the vice presidential candidates

apples to oranges = compare one presidental candidate's experience to the experience of a vice presidential candidate

[Lena Brandenburg]

I swear I've gotten to the point I almost want to stop reading this forum. *sigh*

I'm curious as to why? Because I asked a question? :shrug

[cheribear]

apples to apples = compare the experience of the presidential candidates or the vice presidential candidates

apples to oranges = compare one presidental candidate's experience to the experience of a vice presidential candidate

If the vice president didn't automatically qualify for 'President' upon the death of the president, it wouldn't be apples to oranges. But all four people are expected to be able to run the country. So its apples to apples, to me.

The understudy has to be just as capable as the performer he's expected to replace at a moment's notice, right?

But maybe that's a whole 'nother thread.

[tammy1999]

Palin is the only one out of the 4 who has executive experience. I think that experience is enough.

[Microferk ~ Miki Ferkul]

apples to apples = compare the experience of the presidential candidates or the vice presidential candidates

apples to oranges = compare one presidental candidate's experience to the experience of a vice presidential candidate

However considering the 10 year survival rate for Senator McCain falls somewhere in between 36 and 60%, I think there is an extremely compelling reason to evaluate Gov. Palin's suitability for POTUS.

[Tiffikat]

No not just you. I'm just overall sick of the ridiculous amount of threads attacking Obama in one way or another. I've been practically begging all day to hear more positive things all around but this is the third or fourth new thread today about Obama that is negative. I simply do not understand the need for everyone to attack either candidate instead of posting the positive points.

I guess it wouldn't bother me so much if all of it was entirely factual but it is not. As Sue mentioned he has previous experience in the State Senate that should count for something.

I've said repeatedly today that it is unlikely anyone here is going to change their mind on their candidate at this late state. However, according to many polls the key to getting the undecided voters is to get out positive information about your candidate. Studies and polls have shown that independent voters and undecided voters do not like the attacks from either side.

[Lena Brandenburg]

However considering the 10 year survival rate for Senator McCain falls somewhere in between 36 and 60%, I think there is an extremely compelling reason to evaluate Gov. Palin's suitability for POTUS.

I've not heard that statistic before. Point taken!

[txmusicmom]

I swear I've gotten to the point I almost want to stop reading this forum. *sigh*

I'm curious as to why? Because I asked a question? :shrug

;)

[Glueless Media]

I've not heard that statistic before. Point taken!

Point is well taken but then again we all could go out at any time, accidents, war, bombs. I still will stand my chances with M-P.:)

[Tiffikat]

I'm not sure I understand the wink there Donna. I explained my thoughts in reply to Lena. Was that really necessary? Perhaps I am taking this the wrong way but the wink to me implies that you are amused by the fact that I am distressed by something.

[Lena Brandenburg]

Point is well taken but then again we all could go out at any time, accidents, war, bombs. I still will stand my chances with M-P.:)

As will I, but I can more understand people questioning her experience. Which, as was pointed out, she HAS executive experience so it's nothing I'm personally concerned about. I can understand better why the apples to oranges comparisons.

[Glueless Media]

As will I, but I can more understand people questioning her experience. Which, as was pointed out, she HAS executive experience so it's nothing I'm personally concerned about. I can understand better why the apples to oranges comparisons.

Exactly:) I understand both sides, I really do.:)

[vegaschristina]

Palin is the only one out of the 4 who has executive experience. I think that experience is enough.

Palin has executive experience. There...I said it. She's been the executive of running one of the smallest (by population) if not the smallest state in the country. She was executive over 680,000 population state. The United States has a population of over 303 million people! She was executive of only 0.224% of the people in our country.

So basically, she's been executive of a Taco Bell restaurant, but now wants to run the Fortune 500 company.

Sorry, it just doesn't wash for me.

[Scorpiosue1102]

I think it's also important that Senator Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School where he was voted the first black President of the Harvard Law Review. He also taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago for 8 years and 7 years as a Illinois state senator before he was voted to the U.S. Senate in 2004. I don't think that those accomplishments are to be sneezed at.

[Lena Brandenburg]

Sorry, it just doesn't wash for me.


neither does comparing the Illinois State Senate to the United States Senate

[Theresa Hernandez]

Unless someone has been president of the US, they don't have the direct experience they need for the job. And since no one is running for re-election, that's not even an issue in this election.

Obama has proven he's a leader. What is the president if not the leader of the free world? He has shown he has diplomatic abilities and the respect of our allies.

If you're looking to hire someone at your place of business and you get two resumes:

1) from someone who has done almost exactly everything you're looking for, but maybe in a different setting, but has an attitude problem and a bit of a short temper and tends to ramble all over the place in his interview, or

2) someone who has less experience, but real experience doing most of the things you need, but maybe at a different level, yet he interviews really well and explains why his lesser experience isn't really a drawback because he's got support from some of the brightest minds and most experienced people in the country that will serve as advisors to him in his position.

Who do you hire? I hire guy 2. But not everyone would. Which is why this election is as close as it is.

But, maybe that will help you understand how intelligent, informed people could make a decision that's different than the one you would make.

[tammy1999]

Palin has executive experience. There...I said it. She's been the executive of running one of the smallest (by population) if not the smallest state in the country. She was executive over 680,000 population state. The United States has a population of over 303 million people! She was executive of only 0.224% of the people in our country.

So basically, she's been executive of a Taco Bell restaurant, but now wants to run the Fortune 500 company.

Sorry, it just doesn't wash for me.

So you are saying the requirement for VP is to be an executive of a huge state? Experience is experience. That works well for me. :)

[Scorpiosue1102]

Republicans are for smaller gov't and more states rights (usually) so wouldn't t state senator be part of voting for laws for those states? You can't have smaller gov't and have states take care of things, but then say that a state senator is not worth mentioning.

[mama_pajama]

Honestly, his lack of experience in politics at the national level is one of the things that I like about Obama. I'm tired of the old boy network in Washington. I'm sick of people claiming that they have the answers to problems that they themselves had a heavy hand in creating. Obama's platform of change is exactly what I want.

And yes, you could say that Palin is also a change, except that her time as mayor and her short term as governor have already produced more scandal than some politicians see in a lifetime.

[Microferk ~ Miki Ferkul]

Point is well taken but then again we all could go out at any time, accidents, war, bombs. I still will stand my chances with M-P.:)

All VERY true.
But statistically, I'm betting his chances of dying in office are so very much higher than Senator Obama's chances from the aforementioned causes.
I'lll look around and see if I can find anything.

[Theresa Hernandez]

All VERY true.
But statistically, I'm betting his chances of dying in office are so very much higher than Senator Obama's chances from the aforementioned causes.
I'lll look around and see if I can find anything.

I'm not sure he's going to die, but with his age and health issues, I'm more concerned with him having a major health issue that incapacitates him than anything else.

[maggie965]

I swear I've gotten to the point I almost want to stop reading this forum. *sigh*

I get a chuckle from it. There are stretches and stretches and more stretches. It's amusing really...

[mama_pajama]

Also, of the 4 people on the ballot, Palin's the one I would least like to see in the office of president.

[maggie965]

I'm not even certain if I should post this, as this subforum seems to be leaning quite left...but I can't help but get some other opinions on this matter...it certainly provides food for thought on Obama's experience...what do you think about it?




My take on it? Well consider the source...of course I will take anything I read with a grain of salt...but honestly, even if we count non-working days in the senate...the point is he's highly inexperienced. :shrug It's funny because lots of people are comparing his inexperience to Palin's. Well that's comparing apples to oranges, not apples to apples. I'm fascinated to learn what you ladies think about this. :)

Isn't that 143 more days at the federal level than Palin has?

[hellosunshine]

Sigh, how come the thread for the positives about McCain has so few responses and these threads dragging up this kind of stuff have so many responses? I can tell why McCain is behind, it's because his supporters are looking at stuff about Obama and not him.

This issue of experience was hashed and rehashed when Palin was chosen. It's simple, if I were opening a new McDonald's and Bill Gates offered to be manager, I'd hire him despite his lack of experience in flipping hamburgers. Why would I hire him-- because he is a man of intelligence and vision beyond the ordinary. He dreams BIG!!

In the same way, Obama has a vision for this country that I agree with. I believe that a leader has to start with a vision of how things can be and then aim towards achieving that vision. For me, no matter the experience of Palin and McCain, they don't have the vision that I agree with. Their experience doesn't matter to me, because I don't agree with what they would do with that experience. Simple.

[strangejen]

Isn't that 143 more days at the federal level than Palin has?

heh. yeah, if we're sneezing at STATE senate, then how is STATE governing impressive?

[NellieRose]

I guess I don't understand why 7 years as an Illinois state senate is thrown out of the equation.:shrug

I have never understood this either? I guess it sounds better to say he's only been a Senator (US) for 2 years as opposed to saying he has been a Senator (State & US combined) for coming up on 12 years? :shrug

Not throwing stones here but usually when I hear his experience of 2 years being mentioned it is not coming from the Democratic side.

[NellieRose]

Unless someone has been president of the US, they don't have the direct experience they need for the job. And since no one is running for re-election, that's not even an issue in this election.

Obama has proven he's a leader. What is the president if not the leader of the free world? He has shown he has diplomatic abilities and the respect of our allies.

If you're looking to hire someone at your place of business and you get two resumes:

1) from someone who has done almost exactly everything you're looking for, but maybe in a different setting, but has an attitude problem and a bit of a short temper and tends to ramble all over the place in his interview, or

2) someone who has less experience, but real experience doing most of the things you need, but maybe at a different level, yet he interviews really well and explains why his lesser experience isn't really a drawback because he's got support from some of the brightest minds and most experienced people in the country that will serve as advisors to him in his position.

Who do you hire? I hire guy 2. But not everyone would. Which is why this election is as close as it is.

But, maybe that will help you understand how intelligent, informed people could make a decision that's different than the one you would make.

Great way to explain the points of view. :clap

[Gina.Maria]

I'm not even certain if I should post this, as this subforum seems to be leaning quite left...but I can't help but get some other opinions on this matter...it certainly provides food for thought on Obama's experience...what do you think about it?




My take on it? Well consider the source...of course I will take anything I read with a grain of salt...but honestly, even if we count non-working days in the senate...the point is he's highly inexperienced. :shrug It's funny because lots of people are comparing his inexperience to Palin's. Well that's comparing apples to oranges, not apples to apples. I'm fascinated to learn what you ladies think about this. :)

Conservatives and Liberals alike - in this forum, even - have admitted that NO ONE is ever prepared for the job of President. Clinton said it himself - he wasn't prepared. If you look at before and after pictures of all our presidents (only since the days of photography, of course, I don't trust the revisionism of artists ;)) the office has an amazing aging effect that goes far beyond the type of aging that most people experience in 4 - 8 years.

I think, considering that, Obama will bring an energy and robustness to the job that is desperately needed in this time of economic crisis and war.

[kjbstevens]

I think all it means is that he has been one of the major problems messing up this country for those days he has been in the Senate just like 2 others running. It's the one thing I gave Palin is at least she didn't vote for the bailout. LOL

I do not like Senators running at all. There is no real leadership in that unless you are a party leader or the Speaker. None of them 3 of them are. They are just a voice in an annoying crowd. I'm not comfortable with any of that. I voted for someone in the primary that had been gov of his state at least. Hillary at least has been in the White House I guess, but then she is a senator now. *sigh*

[[michele]]

heh. yeah, if we're sneezing at STATE senate, then how is STATE governing impressive?

Columbus has more people than Alaska. Just sayin' ;)

:) Michele

[Gina.Maria]

Sigh, how come the thread for the positives about McCain has so few responses and these threads dragging up this kind of stuff have so many responses? I can tell why McCain is behind, it's because his supporters are looking at stuff about Obama and not him.

This issue of experience was hashed and rehashed when Palin was chosen. It's simple, if I were opening a new McDonald's and Bill Gates offered to be manager, I'd hire him despite his lack of experience in flipping hamburgers. Why would I hire him-- because he is a man of intelligence and vision beyond the ordinary. He dreams BIG!!

In the same way, Obama has a vision for this country that I agree with. I believe that a leader has to start with a vision of how things can be and then aim towards achieving that vision. For me, no matter the experience of Palin and McCain, they don't have the vision that I agree with. Their experience doesn't matter to me, because I don't agree with what they would do with that experience. Simple.

You have such a poetic way with words. :wub

[Charlene]

Sigh, how come the thread for the positives about McCain has so few responses and these threads dragging up this kind of stuff have so many responses? I can tell why McCain is behind, it's because his supporters are looking at stuff about Obama and not him.

This issue of experience was hashed and rehashed when Palin was chosen. It's simple, if I were opening a new McDonald's and Bill Gates offered to be manager, I'd hire him despite his lack of experience in flipping hamburgers. Why would I hire him-- because he is a man of intelligence and vision beyond the ordinary. He dreams BIG!!

In the same way, Obama has a vision for this country that I agree with. I believe that a leader has to start with a vision of how things can be and then aim towards achieving that vision. For me, no matter the experience of Palin and McCain, they don't have the vision that I agree with. Their experience doesn't matter to me, because I don't agree with what they would do with that experience. Simple.

Very well said :clap

[hellosunshine]

Thanks Gina Marie and Charlene. I'm honored.

[kinderkim]

I look it at this way-they're all inexperienced with regards to being President.

They all have some sort of experience in public office. And they're all politicans, so none of them are new to all the sleazy stuff that goes along with that.

For me, 'experience' is just not an issue in this campaign.

[4PeasInMyPod]

No not just you. I'm just overall sick of the ridiculous amount of threads attacking Obama in one way or another. I've been practically begging all day to hear more positive things all around but this is the third or fourth new thread today about Obama that is negative. I simply do not understand the need for everyone to attack either candidate instead of posting the positive points.

I guess it wouldn't bother me so much if all of it was entirely factual but it is not. As Sue mentioned he has previous experience in the State Senate that should count for something.

I've said repeatedly today that it is unlikely anyone here is going to change their mind on their candidate at this late state. However, according to many polls the key to getting the undecided voters is to get out positive information about your candidate. Studies and polls have shown that independent voters and undecided voters do not like the attacks from either side.

Um, maybe it's just easier to attack Obama than to come up with something positive about the McCain candidacy, at least that's what McCain/Palin must think.