Journal pudge's Journal: Another Question for Fans of Kerry, Obama 19
Can you name for me a single person in this world who will vote for Obama over McCain because Sarah Palin is inexperienced?
Just one person. Not a hypothetical one, an actual one, who isn't lying.
No, you can't, because it's a nonsensical proposition.
Obama has less experience than any President or Vice President candidate of either party -- yes, including both John Edwards and Dan Quayle -- in almost 70 years, except for Spiro Agnew, if you count both national legislative, state executive, or federal executive experience.
Read that again: except for Agnew, every Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate of either party in the last 68 years has more experience than Barack Obama.
And somehow, Palin's experience, which is in fact comparable in depth (though of a different type) to Obama's is going to make people choose
I can see the ads now: "Don't vote for McCain: he has one of the least experienced running mates in modern history. Instead, vote for Obama, who is by far the least experienced candidate for President in the last 68 years!"
How is this a good argument for Obama?
Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.
Well, TBF (Score:1)
I used to live in Alaska.. I remember driving between Fairbanks and Anchorage frequently. One of the smaller towns you run through is Wasilla. This is a town of like 5,000 people (maybe it's grown since I was there 15-20 years ago). So I wouldn't consider her experience prior to becoming the AK governor all that illustrious... she served as a city council member (a position probably easier to get than a PTA board seat at a more populous neighborhood) and then mayor.. I bet the dean of the community colle
Re: (Score:2)
And vice president seems like the best place for picking up "presidential" experience without actually being the president.
Picking her seems like a really smart choice to me.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't consider her experience prior to becoming the AK governor all that illustrious
You are missing my point.
My point is that no matter how inexperienced she is, Obama is still less experienced than EVERY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IN 68 YEARS.
Obama pointing out her lack of experience only emphasizes that experience is important, and reminds people that he has significantly less than everyone who came before him, for the last 68 years.
Re: (Score:1)
Not at all.. I entirely understand and agree with your point.. it just would have been redundant to make that agreement explicit. Really what I was getting at was basically that as exceptionally inexperienced as Obama is, Palin's level of experience is actually at a caliber lower than his. Picking her as a VP nom is pretty shocking to me in that light. Obama is also shockingly inexperienced, but he's been able to ignite his party with a passion that has been gone for some time and the Dems really believe
Re: (Score:2)
as exceptionally inexperienced as Obama is, Palin's level of experience is actually at a caliber lower than his.
No, it's not. I don't buy that at all. His experience is different, but not greater. Governing a state for a few years gives you more experience for the Presidency than being a do-nothing party-line U.S. Senator for a few years.
And yeah, he has a couple more years than she does, but he's been running for President most of that time, and if he wants to argue that being on the campaign trail gave him experience, then that undercuts his arguments about HILLARY'S lack of experience.
Picking her as a VP nom is pretty shocking to me in that light. Obama is also shockingly inexperienced, but he's been able to ignite his party with a passion that has been gone for some time and the Dems really believe that could win the election for them.
And Palin does the same th
Re: (Score:1)
as exceptionally inexperienced as Obama is, Palin's level of experience is actually at a caliber lower than his.
No, it's not. I don't buy that at all. His experience is different, but not greater. Governing a state for a few years gives you more experience for the Presidency than being a do-nothing party-line U.S. Senator for a few years.
Actually, that's a good point.. Governors tend to make it to the oval office more because their job can translate better (except here in TX; lieutenant governor wears the pants here). But Alaska isn't just 'a' state. It's the second least populous state in the union (second to Wyoming). Likewise, Obama was a U.S. senator for Illinois, the four or fifth most populous state. I'm prepared to concede as far as saying her experience may be on par, but she represents about 600,000 Americans from her office i
Re: (Score:2)
But how on earth can you say that Palin has ignited her party with anything but an imminent need to look her up on Wikipedia just to figure out who the hell she is?
Because I spent the day at the GOP booth at the county fair.
Everyone -- literally everyone -- who wasn't a hardcore Democrat was very excited about Palin. I was actually taken aback a bit by just how excited everyone was (not just with her, but with McCain and Dino Rossi, our governor candidate, too).
One young woman (no more than 20, I reckon) registered to vote for the first time. She said she wasn't planning to vote at all. Now she's planning to vote for McCain because of Palin.
The excitement may not l
Experence is not a good attack on Palin (Score:2)
I would have done two things:
1. The psyops attack, iow praise her highly and make the conservatives start wondering what is wrong with her if the Dems like her so much. Think Harriet Meyers and Sen. Reid's praise of her.
2. Go after her on policy. Less chance of it backfiring.
The media might still go after her on experience or make sexist attacks but if you are the Obama campaign you want to stay away from that.
If serious questions start being raised about her and the CW is turning toward her being a bad cho
Re: (Score:2)
I would have done two things:
1. The psyops attack, iow praise her highly and make the conservatives start wondering what is wrong with her if the Dems like her so much. Think Harriet Meyers and Sen. Reid's praise of her.
2. Go after her on policy. Less chance of it backfiring.
Agreed. The new ad [youtube.com] is deceptive and full of crap, but it avoids the major pitfalls of attacking her.
If serious questions start being raised about her and the CW is turning toward her being a bad choice you can maybe use that to question McCain's judgement.
They are already doing that. The Dem talking points are shifting from "she is inexperienced" to "McCain;s judgment is poor."
Re: (Score:2)
I thought he agreed with Bush like 98% or 95% of the time. Now, it's 90%?
The other thing that struck me: "He wants to continue spending $10 billion per month in Iraq." Sorry but I just can't parse those words as being anything but a lie. Seriously, does anyone WANT to spend billions on Iraq? Some reluctantly believe that we have to or a bad situation will get worse. A point definitely worthy of debate. But no one likes the situation, wants to spend billions or is happy thousands have died.
Re: (Score:2)
The other thing that struck me: "He wants to continue spending $10 billion per month in Iraq." Sorry but I just can't parse those words as being anything but a lie. Seriously, does anyone WANT to spend billions on Iraq?
Right, that's the worst part, because Obama "wants" to do the exact same thing. Both of them plan to keep as many troops in Iraq as necessary to help keep the country together until Iraq can do it on its own.
I wonder if it'll make some people choose... (Score:1)
...to stay home. That is, people who would've voted for McCain largely because of Obama's lack of experience, and the frightening prospect of someone so young and inexperienced being in the Whitehouse. Unfortunately now the GOP ticket has the exact same problem.
Re: (Score:2)
...to stay home. That is, people who would've voted for McCain largely because of Obama's lack of experience, and the frightening prospect of someone so young and inexperienced being in the Whitehouse. Unfortunately now the GOP ticket has the exact same problem.
I was at the State Fair yesterday. EVERYONE who came by the GOP booth, except for two Democrats, was exicted about Palin. One young girl who has never voted before and said she wasn't planning on voting this year said she would vote for McCain because of Palin. Many conservatives I know who has said they would not vote for McCain, now say they will.
I am not worried about losing votes.
Re: (Score:1)
To reinforce that, I am more likely to vote McCain if MI is close now. While I was never one who threatened to vote for Obama, I was one who would vote 3rd party. At this point, my wife wants to put up a "Palin for Vice President" sign and leave McCain off it.
Re: (Score:2)
HA!
Re: (Score:2)
I think I will. I was thinking I was going to write in Ron Paul because I have never been a big fan of Mccain (sorry I'm too conservative for my own good). I understand that he was the most electable person out of the entire panel, but he may have been my least favorite up there. I really wanted Fred Thompson and/or Ron Paul. I must admit, at first I was shocked and thought Mccain just threw the election away, but the more I look at it. I see the genius of the decision.
She does seem a little unpolished
Presidential candidate experience, lack thereof (Score:1)
Honestly I think the whole "experience" debate is rather pointless, for both sides.
My evidence is best summed up by the following presidents pre-presidential experience in state government/federal government/military:
Abraham Lincoln: One House of Representatives term, four state legislature terms.
Franklin Roosevelt: four years as state governor, one state legislature term.
Theodore Roosevelt: two years as a state governor, one state legislature term.
Woodrow Wilson: two years as state governor.
Dwight Eise
George Bush had less experience in elected office (Score:2)
I keep hearing this experience thing pushed around and it usually goes something like "Barack Obama has less experience than anyone that has run for President in 100 years."
Which is BS frankly.
George W. Bush had the least experience.
He was only the Governor for six years (1995 to 2000), inclusive.
Obama was a state legislator for eight years and has been a national legislator for three more years.
Hold on a second, let me do that math on this one for you guys. Eight plus three is eleven and eleven is way mor
Re:George Bush had less experience in elected offi (Score:2)
I keep hearing this experience thing pushed around and it usually goes something like "Barack Obama has less experience than anyone that has run for President in 100 years."
Which is BS frankly.
Obama has the least experience than any Presidential candidate in 68 years, by the standard I clearly stated: years in a top position in the state or federal executive branch, or as federal legislator.
George W. Bush had the least experience.
He was only the Governor for six years (1995 to 2000), inclusive.
Eisenhower and Wilson both had less elected experience than that (none and two years [as NJ governor], respectively) ... not to mention (again) Willkie who had no experience of any kind actually in government.
Actually, Bush had more elected experience than those three combined ... and you could even throw in B