jdanton

To what extent does experience within a system count?

Is a college coach turning into a pro coach a good analogy?

The constitution doesn't set the bar very high; born here and 35.

I want someone who is smart enough to know he doesn't know everything and will, therefore, surround himself with people who, collectively, know a lot of stuff about the problems we need to solve.

I want someone who will listen to an idea and weigh it's merits regardless of who thought of it.

If the candidate has a voting record, I want one I mostly agree with.

I want one who gives SOME specificity as to how he plans to move toward his stated goals.

I want on who will take time, whenever time is available, to study a question, get some advice, and do what is required to make the best decision.

__________________
Author: Memoirs of a Sleepless Mind, a book you CAN judge by its cover.

EvilMonkey

I take it you are referring to Obama with this satement:
I am sure he would surround himself with people who are knowledgable, don't all presidents do that and when did he say he wouldn't? I think the college to pro analogy is a good one, there have been many successful coaches that have done it, although I don't know if any who hadn't either.

What all this comes down to is Hillary's "experience" which doesn't mean squat to me especially when her time as a first lady is counted towards it. I will always take the person I feel is best for the job, regardless of past experience. IMO If the people want something new and real change then they should vote for the person they best feels represents that. We've had Bill (aka Hillary) and we've had Bush, it's time for a real change.

CosmicRocker

an effective President - one able to work the Congress, and the bureauacracies.

One who doesn't govern by ideaology - more practicle by nature who can work the political landscape.

Plans are nice. But plans don't mean a thing without the ability to get it done.

__________________

Traveling Wilburys (l to r)

Bob Dylan, Jeff Lynne, Tom Petty, George Harrison, Roy Orbison

Veronica

J.D.,

All of your political posts are placed to either to raise up Hillary or call into doubt Obama. I have had extensive sales hiring experience, and I through this experience our company broke barriers when we promoted youth over experience. Why did this happen you may ask? Because they had no predisposed ideas on what could be achieved, they were not afraid to ask for help and welcomed feedback. Unlike the experienced vet who is less open to new ideas and has a cap on their own expectations. Sales numbers went through the roof with aggressive young talent.

Everything you list describes Obama. He would surround himself with the right people. He would seek change. You admire Clinton for not answering hypotheticals but you blast Obama for not engaging in the same trap. Hillary doesn't have an answer on how she would bring pro life and pro choice people together. I also read that you believe people's opinions don't matter unless they have voting records to back them. There is a lot of gray matter in between voting records that makes up a candidate, and everyones opinion does matter, not just pompous, repetitious VIP posters.

EvilMonkey

Here's a snip from the NY Times that makes a lot of sense.
In no way, shape or form does "eight years with a front-row seat on history" qualify as "experience" in my book. What a crock, it's like the only thing she has to go on is riding Bill's coat tails. Then people bash Obama who's made it on his own this whole time. Whatever.

I work from home a lot developing websites, writing code, networking, etc. and my wife couldn't even tell you what a URL is.

jdanton

I can't think of any college football coach, other than Jimmy Johnson, who were successful in the pros, though there must have been. I remember a guy coming up a few years ago, not succeeding, and going back to college ball.

I don't discount her first lady roll as experience, it's just a different type of experience.

She did meet a lot of world leaders as first lady. She did witness close up the trials and errors of putting a white house team together.

Frankly, I tire of the word "change" as if any change will be for the good. Granted, after G.W. the odds would favor good, but just because something is different, doesn't mean it's better.

I've posted numerous times that I have no reason to believe any of these candidates would not surround themselves with good people.

__________________
Author: Memoirs of a Sleepless Mind, a book you CAN judge by its cover.

EvilMonkey

That being the case I would think it might better serve her to mention an established good rapport with world leaders rather than experience. Personally I would find that to be believable and think that it would serve her well.

jdanton

I don't believe I have ever "blasted" Obama. I have pointed out that he has failed to explain how he plans to unite the country without bridging those divides such as abortion.

My effort with this thread was to try to keep names out of it: I failed.

I've also pointed out that Obama complained more loudly than anyone over Hillary's answer to the drivers license question, then, when asked the same question in the next debate, his answer was worse than hers was.

She was taken aback because the question itself misrepresented her previously stated position. What was his excuse.

For the most part, the ONLY thing negative I've been saying about Obama and Edwards is that neither of them offers any specifics as to how they plan on doing what they say they'll do. Biden and Hillary have done so.

I think we each have the right and the responsibility to determine how much experience in and around DC we want or don't want. I think we each have the right to accept the word "change" as meaning "change" we want or not.

Personally, I'd like to know WHAT they want to change and HOW they want to change it.

It's like when someone says, "Let's get rid of waste." it sounds good. Then you learn his "waste" and your "waste" are two different things.

Every one of these democratic candidates is a huge step up from any of athe republican candidates.

There are difference between them, and they each bring a little something to the table.

I've stated here, fairly specifically, that "change" sans more definition is not necessarily a good thing, so I want more details.

I've stated here that if a candidate makes a pledge, I want to know if it's something the president CAN do via executive order, or if it's something he needs congress to pass; more details.

No disrepect intended, but to assume a candidates who wants to bring
"change" means the same changes YOU would make, is a recipe for disappointment.

__________________
Author: Memoirs of a Sleepless Mind, a book you CAN judge by its cover.

jdanton

She's mentioned this. Doesn't seem to get the coverage that her cleavage got.

What I tried to do, and failed so far, with this thread was to keep names out of it.

Let's say some generic/hypthetical candidate were running. What are the qualifications you'd like him to have.

Let us also remember one brutal fact of life. None of us know what kind of president anybody will actually be until they are in office.

How does a president do a good job? Maybe that should be the question.

My view has been that the president is the sum total of the people he surrounds himself with. AND he encourages Congress to check and balance things.

I try to look at this as if I were president. There's a whole lot of stuff I don't know or understand. I do know others understand various things that i don't.

The last thing I, as president, want to make is a bad decision. That means I need good honest input from people who are qualified to give it.

If I base my decision on advise from knowledgeable, trustworthy people AND the bi-partison support of athe congress, it's probably a good decision.

__________________
Author: Memoirs of a Sleepless Mind, a book you CAN judge by its cover.

Sean

I would like someone who does not wear their religion on their sleeve.