Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Perogie

(687 posts)
Sat Feb 20, 2016, 12:33 PM Feb 2016

How much of a factor should experience be in electing a President.

The argument has been made that Hillary Clinton should be President because she has more experience.
Does experience translate into being a good/effective President?

President Obama was a one term US Senator and one term Sate Senator before running for President. No foreign policy experience at all. Yet President Obama hasn’t done a bad job especially on Foreign policy.

I know, you say Sanders is not Barack Obama. I’m not saying he is. This is an exercise in discussing experience.

If we are to believe experience makes a candidate a better choice, then George W H Bush should have been an awesome President. He was member of Congress, Ambassador to the United Nations, Envoy to China, Director of CIA, Vice President. That’s a pretty impressive resume. Yet few would say he was a great or even good President.

John F Kennedy had only one term in the US House and one as a US Senator. Nixon had a lot more experience.
Yet Kennedy did pretty well if I remember.

Lincoln had two terms in the US House. Not a lot of experience but he did an excellent job. In fact he has been ranked as the #1 President by a 2015 poll, administered by the American Political Science Association among political scientists specializing in the American presidency.

So there must be something else and experience doesn’t determine if a person will be a good or great President.

Character? Integrity?

It's certainly something other than experience.

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How much of a factor should experience be in electing a President. (Original Post) Perogie Feb 2016 OP
I don't think anyone could possibly be ready to be president no matter how much experience at other PatrickforO Feb 2016 #1
Predictability HassleCat Feb 2016 #2
Dick Cheney has more experience than any modern candidate. HooptieWagon Feb 2016 #3
It's more of a bar that one must clear firebrand80 Feb 2016 #4

PatrickforO

(14,599 posts)
1. I don't think anyone could possibly be ready to be president no matter how much experience at other
Sat Feb 20, 2016, 12:35 PM
Feb 2016

positions they've had. Vision and integrity are the key to success. That's why I am for Bernie. His vision is clear and his integrity is obvious, there for all to see.

 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
2. Predictability
Sat Feb 20, 2016, 12:38 PM
Feb 2016

With Clinton, we feel we have an idea of what she would do in various circumstances, and that makes people happy. It doesn't please me, because I believe her foreign policy will be overly aggressive, and there's a good chance we will attack Iran. But it's reassuring to many.

firebrand80

(2,760 posts)
4. It's more of a bar that one must clear
Sat Feb 20, 2016, 12:51 PM
Feb 2016

I think tha once the voting public determines that a candidate is "ready" they look at other factors. I doubt that many people vote based on "degrees of readiness."

On the other hand, if people think a candidate is "not ready" I think they will unlikely give their vote to that candidate no matter what the other issues are.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»How much of a factor shou...