Presidential Experience: Why does it matter so much?

[Midnight Judges]

Seems to me the longer a politician is in Washington, the higher the chances they are tainted. I don't just mean tainted by the obvious: good old boys network, lobbyists and corruption. I mean tainted by intellectual laziness, owing favors, "perception is reality," status quo beliefs and a complete isolation from the regular folks.

I believe intellectual laziness and status quo beliefs got us into the Iraq war. The Washington Post reported that no more than 6 Senators showed up to read the entire 92 page NIE before the Iraq war vote. Hundreds of thousands of lives on the line, and 92 pages of reading is too much to ask from 94% of our Senators. :mad:

Hillary Clinton now holds an advantage in super delegates because many of them owe their emergence and power to the original Clinton administration. So they are beholden NOT to their constituents, NOT to our democratic principles and process, but to her.

I won't go into detail about what "experience" has gotten us with the current administration.

And with that "experience" comes a multitude of political enemies and burned bridges making it impossible to compromise or reason clearly. Politics becomes personal, more about resisting the other side than accomplishments.

At this point excess experience brings as much skepticism as comfort for me.

[#98QBKiller]

Barack Obama is that you?

[SkinsFanAnt]

As far as anyone knows, Bill Clinton is the only person in this race with 'Presidential Experience'. Hilla-monster hasn't been president, so as far as I'm concerned, there's no issue here...

[PeterMP]

Seems to me the longer a politician is in Washington, the higher the chances they are tainted. I don't just mean tainted by the obvious: good old boys network, lobbyists and corruption. I mean tainted by intellectual laziness, owing favors, "perception is reality," status quo beliefs and a complete isolation from the regular folks.

I believe intellectual laziness and status quo beliefs got us into the Iraq war. The Washington Post reported that no more than 6 Senators showed up to read the entire 92 page NIE before the Iraq war vote. Hundreds of thousands of lives on the line, and 92 pages of reading is too much to ask from 94% of our Senators. :mad:

Hillary Clinton now holds an advantage in super delegates because many of them owe their emergence and power to the original Clinton administration. So they are beholden NOT to their constituents, NOT to our democratic principles and process, but to her.

I won't go into detail about what "experience" has gotten us with the current administration.

And with that "experience" comes a multitude of political enemies and burned bridges making it impossible to compromise or reason clearly. Politics becomes personal, more about resisting the other side than accomplishments.

At this point excess experience brings as much skepticism as comfort for me.

Well, I think McCain is the exception to the ability to compromise part at least.

I think it is important simply looking at the current regime. They weren't REALLY an experienced bunch (despite how I see people trying to portray them now). They hadn't ever been leaders. They aren't people that had a history in taking on and really making a difference on important issues. They had been bit players that were suddenly thrust into making critical decisions and weren't up to the challenge.

Somebody that has shown they can do it at the federal level, I think does have an advantage. I don't feel like digging up the quote, but I'm sure that Bush has stated that he has underestimated the degree or partianship in Washington before he was elected. Somebody coming in from the outside isn't going to change that at this point in time. To me, it makes more sense to elect somebody that has seen it, knows about it, knows all of the players and history, and has shown they can work through it.

[Zguy28]

I believe intellectual laziness and status quo beliefs got us into the Iraq war. The Washington Post reported that no more than 6 Senators showed up to read the entire 92 page NIE before the Iraq war vote. Hundreds of thousands of lives on the line, and 92 pages of reading is too much to ask from 94% of our Senators. :mad:

Clinton and McCain admitted to not reading it. Sad, isn't it.

[paige3girl]

Barack Obama is that you?

LOL! :laugh:

[Midnight Judges]

Well, I think McCain is the exception to the ability to compromise part at least.

I think it is important simply looking at the current regime. They weren't REALLY an experienced bunch (despite how I see people trying to portray them now). They hadn't ever been leaders. They aren't people that had a history in taking on and really making a difference on important issues. They had been bit players that were suddenly thrust into making critical decisions and weren't up to the challenge.

Somebody that has shown they can do it at the federal level, I think does have an advantage. I don't feel like digging up the quote, but I'm sure that Bush has stated that he has underestimated the degree or partianship in Washington before he was elected. Somebody coming in from the outside isn't going to change that at this point in time. To me, it makes more sense to elect somebody that has seen it, knows about it, knows all of the players and history, and has shown they can work through it.

I agree McCain is very much the exception here. Despite extreme partisanship, he has demonstrated the ability to legislate. The same can be said for Ted Kennedy.

I don't doubt Bush underestimated the partisanship in Washington. He also contributed to it on a massive scale. I'm convinced a more perceptive candidate would not make that same mistake.

When talking about the experience per the Bush administration I had Cheney/Rumsfeld in mind. Obviously, the Iraq war was their baby. And they bungled it royally.

With history in mind though, we have have had good Presidents both with and without substantial congressional/Presidential experience.