FlyingTiger
(340 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 10:49 PM
Original message |
Do Clinton supporters realize that about half the field was more qualified than her? |
|
I can't be the only one who finds it strange how often Clinton supporters harp on "experience" and "being prepared" and "qualifications" when, in fact, she wasn't even close to being the leader in most of those categories at the beginning of this whole process? If there's this huge swarm of people out there who supposedly care so much about who's "ready on day one," shouldn't they have voted for... Biden? Or Dodd? Or Richardson?
No matter how you judge the true nature of Hillary's resume, the fact is that there were better resumes in the running. So, why isn't this down to Obama and Biden?
|
bellasgrams
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 10:51 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Do BO supporters realize that BO is not qualified at all? They |
|
should, he hasn't done anything.
|
mkultra
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. hes served in elected roles longer than she has. |
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
6. I can name more of his legislative accomplishments than I can Clinton's |
|
And I have asked a few times what substantive bills she has to her name that she was the original sponsor of and played a primary role in getting passed, and have yet to get an answer. During that exchange between Chris Matthews and the Texas legislator who could not name Obama's accomplishments, I was pissed because I would have been very surprised if Stephanie Tubbs Jones could have named any of her accomplishments in the Senate. He has been in the Senate for only 3 years but he has 2 substantive bills to his name already that were signed into law, and many more accomplishments as a state legislator.
|
MannyGoldstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
14. But She's Won So Many Legislative Battles! |
|
I can't think of even a single one right now, but I'm sure that someone will help me out here.
|
papau
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
21. avoid the issue 130 times as "present" - both sides of the issue 5 times w/ "vote mistakes" - plus |
|
a tape police bill as a State Senator plus as a Federal Senator 2 bills - one gave a corporate tax break so as to get GOP co-sponsorship on a 20 million funding of a social need, the other was a "nuclear disarmament" bill that only asked the State Department to do a study that State does every year anyway.
"2 substantive bills to his name already that were signed into law" - the best laugh of the night LOL :-)
|
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
26. You forgot ethics reform, and Clinton's signature accomplishments |
|
Do you have an answer on what her signature accomplishments in the Senate were? I have not been able to find this information.
|
papau
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
49. Illinois ethics reform is a bit of a joke -(I grew up there) - but OK - mark that as |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-09-08 10:15 PM by papau
a plus since he continued in the Federal Senate with the database of earmarks passing - a bit more visibility is always good.
As to Hillary her web site lists them out- covering her years since college (as with Obama becoming President because he post college organized tenants before he became a lawyer for the slumlord Rezko).
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
29. You are relying on that DEBUNKED curculating email-which originated for KOS |
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #29 |
39. No I'm not. I knew that e-mail was wrong when I saw it. |
|
I knew that e-mail was false, because it compared apples to oranges. But Obama has been a principle sponsor of at least 2 bills that were signed into law (ethics reform and nuclear non-proliferation). I tried to find Clinton's bills but it seemed like most of the ones she was a principle author of were sense of the Senate resolutions. If you have examples of bills she has written and gotten passed I would love to hear them...I have been trying to find this info for a while.
|
papau
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #39 |
51. LOL - "nuclear non-proliferation" - Obama's bill had as much effect as a High School paper - indeed |
|
his bill simply told State to produce that paper - which of course State produces every year anyway.
|
MannyGoldstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
13. Obama Hasn't Even Dodged Sniper Fire, Fer Chrissakes! |
|
Never negotiated peace in Ireland... never made SCHIP happen... never named after a famous mountaineer... never fought tooth and nail against NAFTA... what a loser. Even lied about being a professor.
|
UALRBSofL
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
33. Yeah, he just gives a wink and a nod tothecanadians |
|
And has more foreign policy experience because he lived in bangladesh until he was 11.
|
durrrty libby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
15. Exactly. He has done diddly squat. He is a total Fraud and |
|
less qualified than Bush.
|
Hugabear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
32. "Obama is less qualified than Bush" |
|
Please tell me you don't really believe that.
|
Beacool
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #32 |
43. Bush is an idiot, but at least he was a governor. |
|
Obama? A state senator with little to his credit other than the bills that he got to sign in his last year thanks to his mentor Emil Jones. Bills, I might add, who were the work of other legislators.
The guy is all smoke and mirrors.
|
durrrty libby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
47. Facts don't require belief or Kool-Aid |
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
37. Is he younger than 35 and foreign born? |
|
What arbitrary qualifications do you have for the job?
|
Starbucks Anarchist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 10:51 PM
Response to Original message |
mkultra
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 10:52 PM
Response to Original message |
3. if you consider only a hillary run, it is weak, BUT... |
|
a Billary run is very powerful.
|
bilgewaterbill
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 10:54 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Money, name recognition, gender....do you really want more? |
|
Or did you just want to take a shot at Hillary?
|
FlyingTiger
(340 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. Wait, wait... those are GOOD reasons? |
|
If I had just wanted to take a shot at Hillary, those are the things I would have listed.
|
bilgewaterbill
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. You already knew the reasons. |
FlyingTiger
(340 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here. |
slinkerwink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
11. those aren't good reasons to vote for someone |
bilgewaterbill
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
12. He didn't ask for good reasons to vote for someone. He wanted to know |
|
why Hillary, instead of Biden, was currently facing Obama.
|
grrr050
(86 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
31. The real question should be....... |
|
Why is Obama even in the mix? I think I already know the answer to this question but it should have been among Biden,Dodd and HRC. If the likes of Obama can run for president, anybody else can too. But then again GWB had already set the bar too damn low for America.
|
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 10:57 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Richardson had the best resume, IMO |
|
But resumes don't win elections, as we learned in 2004. John Kerry easily had the best resume of any of the Democrats running but it did not make him a good candidate. But I very much agree with your point. Clinton was among the less experienced candidates, and if the presidency were a job you applied for with a resume she wouldn't be the nominee.
|
TexasObserver
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:30 PM
Response to Original message |
16. They were all more experienced than her, including Obama. |
|
Being first lady doesn't count as experience. Her only experience was as a US senator.
Obama, Biden, Richardson, Dodd, Kucinich, Edwards, and Gravel - all more experienced than the sniper dodging first lady from Hick, Arkansas.
|
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
27. I disagree. Being First Lady is valuable experience. |
|
Especially since she was a very active First Lady and essentially served as one of Bill's advisers. So I think it is valuable experience, but it doesn't make her more qualified than anyone else to answer a 3 AM phone call about a national security crisis.
Honestly, I think experience matters, but it's less important than temperament, judgment, and approach. Bush has not been such a disaster because he was inexperienced. He has been a disaster because of his tendency to succumb to group think syndrome, surround himself only with people who agree with him, silence dissent, and hear what he wants to hear. Obama is the exact opposite, going out of his way to seek out dissenting opinions and listen to all sides before making a decision. Obama is also a hell of a lot more intelligent than Bush. Obama has written 2 books and some of his own speeches, while Bush can't even read a 2-page memo and doesn't bother to read the newspaper.
|
Cha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:41 PM
Response to Original message |
17. And hilary's still whinging...she should |
|
be grateful she got this far with her lies and disingenous bullshit.
|
splat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:49 PM
Response to Original message |
18. Keep it up -- then explain to Obama why the Hillary Dems won't vote for him ever |
emilyg
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-08-08 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
30. so much of DU Obama fans act like school-yard bullies |
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
|
I have criticized plenty of inappropriate posts from Obama supporters, but I think this one makes a fair point. And you have been saying for a while that you won't vote for Obama if he is the nominee, so I doubt we could do anything to change that now.
|
purji
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
41. if hillary Dem's wont vote dem than |
|
they aren't Dem's any more are they.
|
Beacool
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
44. You got that right!!!!!!! |
|
I rather vote for a potted plant.
|
Forkboy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
48. Don't blame your foolish decisions on others. |
dkf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 12:43 AM
Response to Original message |
20. Hillary's "experience" sure hasn't taught her how to manage people. |
|
She is gawdawful at it. Watching her run her campaign makes me wonder how she thinks she could ever run the country.
|
donheld
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 02:48 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
22. It seems to have taught her to hire all the wrong people n/t |
ProgressiveMuslim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:56 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
24. My thoughts exactly. A different Sec'y of State each year, perhaps?nt |
BzaDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 03:09 AM
Response to Original message |
23. Do Obama supporters realize that the entire rest of the field was more qualified than him? |
|
And that he's going to lose in the GE because of it? The idea that being a state legislator (for 5 years or 50 years) is now sufficient experience to be President of the United States is laughable.
|
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:23 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
25. Put down the faux crystal ball |
|
First of all, no one can possibly predict what will happen 7 months from now. Secondly, Experience is only one piece of what makes someone a good candidate and good president. Some very bad presidents' have had a lot of experience, some good ones, like Lincoln, have had little. Judgment, temperment and intelligence should also be factored in. And yes, Obama clearly has enough experience to qualify.
|
lefty from jersey
(103 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #25 |
|
Hey, if it was about experience the clear winner would be Dick Cheney. He has decades of experience at the top levels of government. Dick for President, how does that sound?
|
woolldog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
54. Tell that to Abe Lincoln. n/t |
Bicoastal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:35 AM
Response to Original message |
34. No one was saying "What's he DONE?!" when Bill Clinton was running against Tsongas and Brown. |
|
Of if they were, our party largely ignored it.
Seems to me like Obama's mere presence in this race has sparked a rigid new "experience" standard by which all nominees must be measured. Where did that come from, anyway? Plenty of presidents (some of our best) have held elected office for a shorter time than Obama, and at least one that I can think of (Taft) was never elected to any sort of pre-White House office at all!
|
shaniqua6392
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:41 AM
Response to Original message |
35. If we were to believe that this should be based on experience |
|
Obama and Clinton should not even be in the running at all. Gov. Richardson, Sen. Biden, Sen. Dodd should have knocked our two candidates right out of the race months ago. This election is about personality and has nothing to do with experience. People "like" Obama and do not give a rats ass about electing an experienced candidate to get us out of this mess. I am not sure how this will all work out in the end. We will have to wait and see.
|
MyNameGoesHere
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:47 AM
Response to Original message |
36. I would suggest that all of those were better choices than Obama |
|
as well. So that statement has as much significance as a gnat's fart.
|
GoldieAZ49
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 08:58 AM
Response to Original message |
40. and all of them more qualified than Obama |
|
Clinton was never a 'first' choice, for me. She is now the only choice.
Historical election indeed.
|
Beacool
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 09:39 AM
Response to Original message |
42. Do Obama supporters realize that the ENTIRE field was more qualified than him? |
|
You people are way too funny with your adoration of the Chosen One.
:rofl:
|
VotesForWomen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-10-08 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #42 |
55. you beat me to it. O was literally the least qualified out of the entire dem field. nt |
Tom Rinaldo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 09:48 AM
Response to Original message |
45. I understand your point |
|
But if you really want to pursue it Obama wouldn't have made the final cut. Richardson or Dodd had stronger cases than Obama also. Relative experience clearly is one of the relevent variables, and obviusly it gets balenced off against others.
|
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #45 |
46. Based on experience, I agree |
|
Richardson, Biden and Dodd had the strongest resumes of the whole field. But as you said, it's only one variable, and I think we saw in 2004 that resumes don't win elections. Kerry had a great resume but was not a great campaigner...ditto for Richardson, Biden, and Dodd. And I also believe experience is only one of many variables that should be used to determine how successful someone will be as president.
|
scheming daemons
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #45 |
52. The point is that "experience" is over-rated in Presidential elections.....especially.... |
|
...elections where the electorate is EXTREMELY disgruntled with Washington.
America hates Washington right now.... more than ever. "Experience" in Washington is *NOT* a positive during this election.
Hillary's tone-deaf campaign never understood that..... at least not until it was way too late.
|
anonymous171
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 10:15 PM
Response to Original message |
50. Because her experience comes from how Bill let her run the country during his terms. |
woolldog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 11:12 PM
Response to Original message |
53. Ah yes, but Biden was never First Lady. |
|
So his experience isn't as impressive...
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 14th 2024, 11:11 AM
Response to Original message |