Question for Obama supports.....

spyguy
spyguy Posts: 613
edited September 2008 in A Moving Train
does his lack of experience worry you?

and also, if he is such an advocate of change, why did he choose the biggest Washington liberal insider next to ted kennedy?


(before you all flip your lid that I am a war mongering neo-con, I am simply asking a question. I am waiting until after the debates to decide who to vote for but this is a very big concern of mine regarding obama)
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    spyguy wrote:
    does his lack of experience worry you?

    It doesn't worry me...I happen to think he has some experience and that he's not some random joe shmoe walking off the street....I think he can lead, which is important to me...
    spyguy wrote:
    and also, if he is such an advocate of change, why did he choose the biggest Washington liberal insider next to ted kennedy?


    (before you all flip your lid that I am a war mongering neo-con, I am simply asking a question. I am waiting until after the debates to decide who to vote for but this is a very big concern of mine regarding obama)

    as for biden...I really don't know why the chose him...perhaps his foreign policy experience...I like biden...I agree with much of what he says about Irak....I have to ask, what I Obama chose some no-name somebody..? I'd be willing to bet folks with question that choice, too...
  • meme
    meme Posts: 4,695
    Lack of experience does not worry me much. Once the cabinet is in place, everyone has a big role in the day-to-day activities. Also, your constitution does a good job of helping save the day with that check and balances thingy. Let's not forget we would not be in Iraq if Congress did its job.

    On the liberal insider... I don't mind him, and I think wise change has to be about reform, not revolution.
    ... and the will to show I will always be better than before.
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    meme wrote:
    Lack of experience does not worry me much. Once the cabinet is in place, everyone has a big role in the day-to-day activities. Also, your constitution does a good job of helping save the day with that check and balances thingy. Let's not forget we would not be in Iraq if Congress did its job.

    On the liberal insider... I don't mind him, and I think wise change has to be about reform, not revolution.

    fair points.
  • Strangest Tribe
    Strangest Tribe Posts: 2,502
    explain to me how experience would matter, neither candidate has been president before.

    With experience..... If you are "entrenched" it seems to me you might be prone to cater to favorites and likewise owe favors to many.
    the Minions
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    inmytree wrote:
    It doesn't worry me...I happen to think he has some experience and that he's not some random joe shmoe walking off the street....I think he can lead, which is important to me...

    but he really doesnt have any experience. he has never had to make big decisions. he has never managed large groups of people. (sorry running a campaign doesnt count in my book)

    being president, he is going to be faced with some of the biggest decisions that will effect hundreds of millions of people.

    usually when applying for a job, experience is usually the top requirement ya know.



    inmytree wrote:
    as for biden...I really don't know why the chose him...perhaps his foreign policy experience...I like biden...I agree with much of what he says about Irak....I have to ask, what I Obama chose some no-name somebody..? I'd be willing to bet folks with question that choice, too...

    I like biden. he's a mans man if you will. like I read in another thread about bush...."a guy I'd like to have a beer with"

    just seems slightly hypocritical that he picks someone who is nothing about change. thats all obama has been saying change change change.

    maybe by change he means removing Republicans and adding democrats. technically thats change :)
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    Strangest Tribe wrote:
    explain to me how experience would matter, neither candidate has been president before.

    are you serious?
    Strangest Tribe wrote:
    With experience..... If you are "entrenched" it seems to me you might be prone to cater to favorites and likewise owe favors to many.

    thats true.
  • jdr3777
    jdr3777 Posts: 23
    I'm not worried about Obama's so called lack of experiance.He's got plenty of experiance.The republicans uses that same argument against JFK and Bill Clinton.They turned out alright.I'm more worried about Mccains terrible lack of Judgement.
    Also i think the reason why Obama picked Biden was he better rounded out his candidacy.He's a Foreign policy expert, and hes been the chairman of the foreign Relations committee for years.
    He's also a Moderate Democrat.For the last 20 years The republicans have tried to pigeonhole every single democratic senator who's ran for president or vice-president as the most liberal senator.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    spyguy wrote:
    does his lack of experience worry you?
    Not at all. I find it a bit of a plus, actually. Despite appearances (which is a loaded and many layered discussion in it's own rite), he'll likely be the most "average joe" to win the White House since Lincoln.
    spyguy wrote:
    and also, if he is such an advocate of change, why did he choose the biggest Washington liberal insider next to ted kennedy?
    Aside from the fact that moving in a more liberal direction would be change?

    The President leads, the Vice President follows (Bush/Cheney notwithstanding). Joe Biden knows how to get things done in the Senate, and could be a valuable tool in helping push Obama's agenda.
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    RainDog wrote:
    Not at all. I find it a bit of a plus, actually. Despite appearances (which is a loaded and many layered discussion in it's own rite), he'll likely be the most "average joe" to win the White House since Lincoln.

    but how does he perform under pressure? what direction will he go when/if faced with a crisis? we have no idea. nothing to base it on.

    RainDog wrote:
    Aside from the fact that moving in a more liberal direction would be change?
    right, I mentioned this in a previous post.
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    spyguy wrote:
    but he really doesnt have any experience. he has never had to make big decisions. he has never managed large groups of people. (sorry running a campaign doesnt count in my book)

    being president, he is going to be faced with some of the biggest decisions that will effect hundreds of millions of people.

    usually when applying for a job, experience is usually the top requirement ya know.

    By that token, McCain should not be president, either; McCain has no executive experience. By your first measure of experience, only Sarah Palin of the four is qualified to be President. I think it's also stretching it to say he doesn't have any experience; he's not a 30 year long U.S. senator, but he has eight years in the State Senate and four in Congress. It's not like he got out of college, worked at Kinko's for a year and then ran for President.

    1. The experience issue doesn't usually bother me. Sometimes I get scared, that I'm electing someone who will kill me and my family, and then I realize that the McCain campaign has been extremely effective at trying to scare voters into not voting for Obama; they even had one of his supporters (me) having second thoughts. But then I remember the experience Obama does have, and how well I feel he grasps the issues when hearing him speak about policy. I think of some of my favorite thinkers that he has in his corner, who'd hopefully be a part of his cabinet. And, as the past eight years have shown us, our system is so elaborate and powerful that even the most incompetent man in the Oval Office could not tear the country apart, however hard he may try.

    2. Biden; I didn't really think twice about it. I was hoping for Biden because I felt that over time it would soothe the many independents who liked Obama's message but believed he didn't have enough experience. I never thought Obama's mantra of change meant that when you get to washington you exile everyone who's there. I thought it was simply a new approach to doing things. And I guess he found one Washington insider senator who believed in such a thing.
  • Strangest Tribe
    Strangest Tribe Posts: 2,502
    spyguy wrote:
    are you serious?



    thats true.

    Yeah, Obama's been around Washington he's knows what's happening in the world.

    Let me ask you, where you work are you still considered inexperienced after you've been there for 4 years?
    What does it mean? I understand the argument that someone that's been there longer might get a promotion before you but does that make them the best choice?

    I work for a company that has twice given promotions to people with less experience based on their work ethic.

    Is that wrong?
    the Minions
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    jdr3777 wrote:
    I'm not worried about Obama's so called lack of experiance.He's got plenty of experiance.The republicans uses that same argument against JFK and Bill Clinton.

    but he doesnt have "plenty of experience" at least clinton was a governor.
    jdr3777 wrote:
    They turned out alright.I'm more worried about Mccains terrible lack of Judgement.

    fair point. but based on what? his voting record? his age? his part affiliation?
    jdr3777 wrote:
    Also i think the reason why Obama picked Biden was he better rounded out his candidacy.He's a Foreign policy expert, and hes been the chairman of the foreign Relations committee for years.
    He's also a Moderate Democrat.For the last 20 years The republicans have tried to pigeonhole every single democratic senator who's ran for president or vice-president as the most liberal senator.

    true. but he is the complete opposite of "change" have you seen those obama signs ;)
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    Strangest Tribe wrote:
    Yeah, Obama's been around Washington he's knows what's happening in the world.

    so do I. should I run for president?
    Strangest Tribe wrote:
    Let me ask you, where you work are you still considered inexperienced after you've been there for 4 years?
    What does it mean? I understand the argument that someone that's been there longer might get a promotion before you but does that make them the best choice?

    I work for a company that has twice given promotions to people with less experience based on their work ethic.

    Is that wrong?

    no, depends on the situation.
  • jdr3777
    jdr3777 Posts: 23
    You can use that same argument for just about anybody that Obama chose.Plus i think it's more important for him to choose somebody who not only can help push his agenda,but can step in if god forbids something happens to Obama.This is where Mccain totally failed in his judgement when he picked Sara Paling as his VP pick.
  • fugawzi
    fugawzi Posts: 891
    spyguy wrote:
    does his lack of experience worry you?

    and also, if he is such an advocate of change, why did he choose the biggest Washington liberal insider next to ted kennedy?

    As for the experience argument, some of the most successful presidents didn't have a great deal of experience. Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK, Woodrow Wilson and even Bill Clinton and others. You know who has a lot of experience in Washington? Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. A big resume doesn't necessarily translate to good governing. If we went on experience alone, Palin has next to no experience. A mayor of a town of about 7,000 people? A 2 year governor of the 47th most populated state? At least Obama has served in the senate for about 4 years in a much bigger (in terms of population) state. Check out this website for the breakdown of experienced presidents

    http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Info/experience.html

    I don't see how Biden is a "liberal insider". It sounds like a far right talking point. Why is the word liberal so demonized in this country? I also don't get the notion that someone who has been around for a while can't bring change. Seniority doesn't equate to an extension of the status quo. Biden has been in Washington for many many years, but that doesn't mean he won't bring change.

    Like you said, wait until the debates. Especially the VP debate on Oct. 2
    West Palm 2000 I & II/West Palm '03/Tampa '03/Kissimmee '04/Vic Theater '07/West Palm '08/Tampa '08/NYC MSG I & II '08/Philly Spectrum III & IV '09/Cleveland '10/Bristow '10/PJ20 I & II 2011/Pensacola '12/Pittsburgh '13/Denver '14
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    jdr3777 wrote:
    You can use that same argument for just about anybody that Obama chose.Plus i think it's more important for him to choose somebody who not only can help push his agenda,but can step in if god forbids something happens to Obama.This is where Mccain totally failed in his judgement when he picked Sara Paling as his VP pick.

    thats not true. biden is a lifelong politician, washington insider. as far from change as you can get. I like biden and think he would be a fine president god forbid something happens but thats not my point.
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    spyguy wrote:
    so do I. should I run for president?



    You could, but you probably wouldn't get that many votes. That's something important to consider; that for all our talk about Obama's inexperience, lack of Washington time, age, etc, it wasn't like a small group of people decided he be the nominee. Millions and millions of Democratic voters endorsed him as being capable for the Presidency.
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    fugawzi wrote:
    As for the experience argument, some of the most successful presidents didn't have a great deal of experience. Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK, Woodrow Wilson and even Bill Clinton and others. You know who has a lot of experience in Washington? Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. A big resume doesn't necessarily translate to good governing. If we went on experience alone, Palin has next to no experience. A mayor of a town of about 7,000 people? A 2 year governor of the 47th most populated state? At least Obama has served in the senate for about 4 years in a much bigger (in terms of population) state. Check out this website for the breakdown of experienced presidents

    http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Info/experience.html

    I don't see how Biden is a "liberal insider". It sounds like a far right talking point. Why is the word liberal so demonized in this country? I also don't get the notion that someone who has been around for a while can't bring change. Seniority doesn't equate to an extension of the status quo. Biden has been in Washington for many many years, but that doesn't mean he won't bring change.

    Like you said, wait until the debates. Especially the VP debate on Oct. 2

    excellent points about experience. that doesnt always equate to a good thing in washington but I'm more concerned about how he performs under pressure, etc. but good points.
  • jdr3777
    jdr3777 Posts: 23
    Also look up Mccain's involvment in the Keaten 5 scandal.Thats another example of poor judgement on Mccain's part.
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    digster wrote:
    You could, but you probably wouldn't get that many votes. That's something important to consider; that for all our talk about Obama's inexperience, lack of Washington time, age, etc, it wasn't like a small group of people decided he be the nominee. Millions and millions of Democratic voters endorsed him as being capable for the Presidency.

    based on what? a good speech at the 04 convention.

Categories