Sarah Palin!

[senorpogo]

Experience is not important for the president, but it is for the vice president? And all that gooey stuff about "base level of experience" is your basic "a miracle occurs" step.

Former town mayor? Meet former state senator. Oh, Barack's an actual US senator now? And Palin's a governor, and they've had a similar amount of experience in those positions (Obama had two years as a senator before he became a full-time presidential candidate).

But please, feel free to expound on the need for experience. Or the lack of need for experience, depending on whether you're talking about Palin or Obama.

What you fail to grasp is that I agree with the positions of Candidate #1 and disagree with Candidate #2's. Candidate #1's credentials are therefore acceptable while Candidate #2's fall short.

I'm particularly taken by Candidate #1's Pro-Skub position.

 

[Pardalis]

But please, feel free to expound on the need for experience. Or the lack of need for experience, depending on whether you're talking about Palin or Obama.

As someone said earlier in the thread, McCain just shot himself in the foot.

His choice for candidate will prevent him from using the only strong point he had against Obama: experience. This issue will no longer be on the table thanks to Palin, he can't even mention experience anymore.

Obama for the gold.

 

[fuelair]

She is every bit as qualified as Obama. We can argue whether she's as qualified as Biden, but I'm astounded that Obama supporters don't see the downside of that argument.

 

[not_so_new]

Experience is not important for the president, but it is for the vice president? And all that gooey stuff about "base level of experience" is your basic "a miracle occurs" step.

Former town mayor? Meet former state senator. Oh, Barack's an actual US senator now? And Palin's a governor, and they've had a similar amount of experience in those positions (Obama had two years as a senator before he became a full-time presidential candidate).

But please, feel free to expound on the need for experience. Or the lack of need for experience, depending on whether you're talking about Palin or Obama.

See my post above for how I feel on this.

In my day job I am a Senior Systems Director in charge of all technology security for a large multinational architectural firm. I have been doing computer and network security specifically for 10 or so years.

There are people out there that have 15 years experience as level one help desk support managers, it's a hard job I feel for them.

That said, I could do their jobs if needed but even though they have more "experience" (time on the job) they don't have the skills to do what I do.

The point is experience is not created equal, time on the job is not a 1 for 1 exchange. Time spent as a counsel member and mayor of a "city" (I use the term loosely) of 5500 people or as the Governor of state smaller than 15 US cities is NOT the same as working in the state senate of the 5th largest state in the nation, or in the US Senate from the same 5th largest state in the nation.

Graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree in journalism with a minor in political science from University of Idaho is NOT the same experience as a earning a BA in Political Science (with a specialization in international relations) from Columbia University and graduating Magna Cum Laude with a Juris Doctor law degree from the Harvard Law School. It just isn't... sorry.

Having a background in TV sports reporting and being Miss Wasilla after winning a beauty contest is NOT the same as having a background in teaching law and as the director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago.

 

[Athyrio]

...ETA: I swear, this thread grew by ten pages between the time I looked at it and the time I posted. I should know by now to stay out of politics!

The Sarah Palin threads are far outstripping the Obama speech thread on JREF. Brilliant move by the McCain camp, stealing the thunder from the long awaited Obama nomination acceptance speech/discussions even on message boards.

 

[Pardalis]

The Sarah Palin threads are far outstripping the Obama speech thread on JREF. Brilliant move by the McCain camp, stealing the thunder from the long awaited Obama nomination acceptance speech/discussions even on message boards.

But for how long? Flash in the pan.

 

[not_so_new]

It's true, she doesn't have a decade of experience being manipulated and made by corrupt Illinois politicians and political hanger-ons.

Right.... and the same can't then be said about McCain and corrupt Washington politicians and political hanger-ons?

If the assumption you are making is that being round corrupt politicians = becoming a corrupt politician and the amount of time being round corrupt politicians = greater chance of becoming one yourself then shouldn't you be more worried about McCain than Obama?

Me, I don't really think McCain or Obama are corrupt and I think your argument is pretty shallow but if it is correct then you are making the point AGAINST the McCain / Palin ticket not for it.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Did you watch the whole video or only the name of the link?

I made certain to watch the whole thing. If you watch the entire thing, you'll see that the very man who was interviewing her (he worked in Reagan's White House) seemed like he was taken aback by her very indifference to the question. He even chides her for it at the end.

Go on, watch it if you don't believe me.

PS: And Brainster, it seems there are quite a few people here who do consider this to be worthy of at least some note. But I've seen that they have already spoken for themselves.

 

[Tricky]

The Sarah Palin threads are far outstripping the Obama speech thread on JREF. Brilliant move by the McCain camp, stealing the thunder from the long awaited Obama nomination acceptance speech/discussions even on message boards.

Yeah, she's new. Fun to talk about. He could nominate Ralph Reed and get a similar outpouring of interest.

Regardless of what Brendan Behan may have said, there is such a thing as bad publicity.

But there's not much to say about Obama's speech. It is pretty much universally regarded as brilliant. Even Obama-haters can't find anything much to criticize, hence the lack of activity on that thread.

 

[MattusMaximus]

But for how long? Flash in the pan.

You're right. Part of this is a ploy by the GOP to change the discussion, but Obama/Biden are already back on message, bashing McCain and his desire to continue a third term of Bush policies. Because that is the bottom line!

As for me, I've found Obama's amazing Thursday night speech online (here it is, btw), and I'm going to send it to everyone I know. My father, who hasn't voted Democratic in recent memory, has told me that "Obama is THE politician I've waited for my entire life!"

My wife's grandparents, who have (as far as I know) never voted Democratic, are very enthusiastic Obama supporters, and McCain's latest screwup (Palin) makes them think he's lost his marbles.

I know so many people who would normally vote Republican who are voting for Obama because he's changed the tone. And that change is sorely needed. I cannot wait until January 20th, 2009.

Go Obama/Biden!

 

[senorpogo]

The point is experience is not created equal, time on the job is not a 1 for 1 exchange. Time spent as a counsel member and mayor of a "city" (I use the term loosely) of 5500 people or as the Governor of state smaller than 15 US cities is NOT the same as working in the state senate of the 5th largest state in the nation, or in the US Senate from the same 5th largest state in the nation.

And I'd argue that legislative experience doesn't equal executive experience thus rendering most of Mr. Obama's credentials up for debate.

I'll agree that Mrs. Palin is inexperienced, maybe so much so as to be deemed unqualified for the position. Personally, I'd like to see a little more of her before I make that judgment. I'd also say that I think Obama is more qualified than her in many ways. Yet, he may also be too inexperienced for the job.

That said, I see Brainster's point. If we're questioning Mrs. Palin's thin experience with good reason, shouldn't the same be done to Mr. Obama's, a person who also has credentials that are arguably thin? And, seeing how he is striving for the more powerful position, shouldn't we scrutinize him even more closely?

 

[senorpogo]

Yeah, she's new. Fun to talk about. He could nominate Ralph Reed and get a similar outpouring of interest.

Regardless of what Brendan Behan may have said, there is such a thing as bad publicity.

But there's not much to say about Obama's speech. It is pretty much universally regarded as brilliant. Even Obama-haters can't find anything much to criticize, hence the lack of activity on that thread.

Complete agreement. She's much more fun to talk about. Plus Obama is a known commodity to a certain degree. Most of us have said everything we have about him.

A side note: McCain is in trouble if his main goal in naming his VP was to win the late August news cycle.

 

[gdnp]

Experience is not important for the president, but it is for the vice president? And all that gooey stuff about "base level of experience" is your basic "a miracle occurs" step.

2 years in state government does not match 8 years in state government and 4 years in federal government, not when running for nationwide office. The only way you can remotely compare her experience to Obama's is to count her time on the council and as mayor of a city of less than 10,000 people. Which although not nothing does not assure me that she has what it takes to step in as leader of the free world, should the necessity arise.

Former town mayor? Meet former state senator.

The Illinois state senate has 57 members representing 12.8 million people, thus each senator represents on average 225,000 constituents from different neighborhoods and communities, and deals with statewide issues and statewide budgets. Palin represented a town of less than 10,000, dealing with local issues and local budgets. I'm guessing 3 orders of magnitude difference in budgets.

Oh, Barack's an actual US senator now? And Palin's a governor, and they've had a similar amount of experience in those positions (Obama had two years as a senator before he became a full-time presidential candidate).

Let's compare apples to apples. Obama has 4 years experience now, at the federal level, vs. Palin's 2 years at the state level. Since the race is happening now, that is the only relevant comparison. No, that is not a similar amount of experience. Sorry.

But please, feel free to expound on the need for experience. Or the lack of need for experience, depending on whether you're talking about Palin or Obama.

I think I've done enough for one post.

It's true, she doesn't have a decade of experience being manipulated and made by corrupt Illinois politicians and political hanger-ons.

Nor does she have a decade of experience resisting the manipulation and corrupting influence of Illinois politics or 4 years dealing with similar real world influences in Washington. Advantage, Obama.

 

[Jimbo07]

Well, in line with my rather insipid prediction, she pushed Obama down in the headlines yesterday. This morning, I notice that Gustav is headlining CNN.com...
I think all of the novelty is going to get old quickly. Looks like all the candidates are going to try to win based on their merits... (or lack thereof in the others )

That's a good point, Jimbo, you go girl!

You're right. Part of this is a ploy by the GOP to change the discussion, but Obama/Biden are already back on message, bashing McCain and his desire to continue a third term of Bush policies. Because that is the bottom line!

Now it's a race.

Even Rasmussen backs this up, validating the idea that the Palin announcement might be best for mitigating the size of an Obama bounce... will it be good for much more, though?

 

[Pardalis]

At least it'll be different from Cheney...

Not sure Id' run with that slogan though.

 

[boloboffin]

It's true, she doesn't have a decade of experience being manipulated and made by corrupt Illinois politicians and political hanger-ons.

No, just a decade or two of being manipulated and made by corrupt oil company lobbyists in Alaska.

 

[senorpogo]

2 years in state government does not match 8 years in state government and 4 years in federal government, not when running for nationwide office.

Can I see this political experience conversion chart you're using? Cause I want to know how many years of lower level legislative experience qualify you to be President as compared to how many years of a governing a state make you a legit VP candidate?

edit to add:

The Illinois state senate has 57 members representing 12.8 million people, thus each senator represents on average 225,000 constituents from different neighborhoods and communities, and deals with statewide issues and statewide budgets. Palin represented a town of less than 10,000, dealing with local issues and local budgets. I'm guessing 3 orders of magnitude difference in budgets.

So having a bigger constituency makes you more qualified for a job? By that logic Arnold Schwarzenegger would be the best president because of his 36 million constituents.

 

[Pardalis]

Why didn't they choose Huckabee?

The fact that they ignored Romney shows alot about their religious "tolerance", but why not Huckabee?

 

[gdnp]

That said, I see Brainster's point. If we're questioning Mrs. Palin's thin experience with good reason, shouldn't the same be done to Mr. Obama's, a person who also has credentials that are arguably thin? And, seeing how he is striving for the more powerful position, shouldn't we scrutinize him even more closely?

As opposed to what we have been doing for the last year, during the primary campaign? His lack of experience has always been one of the major knocks against Obama, and he has been making his counterarguments for the last year and a half. He convinced the Democratic party that his assets outweighed his dearth of experience. It remains to be seen whether he will convince the country as a whole. Palin has yet to go through this vetting process. It's her turn.

 

[senorpogo]

As opposed to what we have been doing for the last year, during the primary campaign? His lack of experience has always been one of the major knocks against Obama, and he has been making his counterarguments for the last year and a half. He convinced the Democratic party that his assets outweighed his dearth of experience. It remains to be seen whether he will convince the country as a whole. Palin has yet to go through this vetting process. It's her turn.

Absolutely. I see no problem with it.

I guess my comments were directed towards people who seemed appalled at the mere notion of questioning Mr. Obama's credentials.