Reply #145: Experience is just a small part of the equation as to what makes a good president.... [View All]

Especially national experience. As I mentioned, Abe Lincoln only had two years national experience. He did fine. And it was not a 1 in 200 million chance because he had strength of character, leadership qualities, was a good orator, etc etc etc. As pointed out above, Bill Clinton didn't have ANY national elected experience before he was elected. He done good! Eisenhower didn't have any elected national experience either and neither did Reagan for that matter if you look at the other side of the aisle. Who says that elected national experience is particularly predictive of success as a president?

It's like a lazy interviewer for a job who doesn't seek out a candidate's real aptitude for the job, his abilities, his character, his motivation, his values, or even his abilities but just asks what "experience" the candidate has. I think everyone who has changed careers in their lifetimes know that it is quite possible to do well in a new endeavor. It is rather droll and uncreative to just see "experience".

It is quite ironic that it is the Hillary folks who seem to be most obsessed with "experience". Ironic because, apart from marrying a President and sometimes being on speaking terms with him, Hillary has only 8 years elected experience, two less years of elected experience than Obama. Yet, the meme is that Obama lacks experience and should wait until next time.

If Hillary is going to campaign in Fall on the basis of "vote for me I am experienced" I suggest she pass out free coffee at her campaign speeches to the crowd, and stronger stimulants for those who are not avid Hillaryites. zzzzzz.....