Candidate's experience? Should it count, or not?

[MethuenProgressive]

Vote for the resume that would most qualify a candidate for the office of President.

[hyphenate]

1. None of those covers what I want to see in a candidate

but definitely would want someone who was knowledgeable about foreign relations and understood constitutional law. I would also want someone whose religious background made creationism anathema, and was keen on the separation of church and state. I also want someone who was experienced with the way government really works, and who wasn't promising things they would never be able to deliver.

In other words, anyone who isn't a repuke.

[doc03]

2. The requirements for the job are

you must be born in the USA and be 35 years old period. We have had Presidents with little experience that did a great job and others with the perfect resume that were a total failure.

[MADem]

3. The candidates have more than that amount of

experience. Richardson did hostage negotiations, Edwards was a successful lawyer, Obama had that time in the state legislature, Clinton was a player on the WATERGATE Commission, to say nothing of First Lady who performed more than a few ambassadorial duties during her tenure.

Bush was a governor, he stunk. Reagan was a governor, he was lazy and over-delegated to Shadow President Baker. Nixon was a congressman, senator and VP, and he was up to snuff on foreign policy, but a domestic shithead and a craven, deceitful bum.

Experience is no guarantee. All things being equal, it can be helpful. But the smart candidate can ameliorate a lack of experience by hiring the right help.

[davidwparker]

4. google the constitution for the requirements of the president. that's what I

want.

[Fredda Weinberg]

5. If HRC had dared as a freshman, she would have been DOA. So,

that's the standard for me.

[Muttocracy]

6. biased poll

Well, obviously your poll is set up to line up with the candidates so you're not really asking about experience.

For me it would be >8 years in federal government of some sort, including substantial foreign relations experience.

I think that narrows it to Biden, Dodd, Richardson, maybe Kucinich? other side, McCain, Paul?, Hunter?

I do agree with your premise. I am very bothered that soon we will have an unexperienced nominee (thanks, media). Hope all those kids voting for Obama are repeated in other states and show up in November.

[MethuenProgressive]

7. I like the way the voting on this poll is turning out.

Richardson's experience qualifies him head and shoulders above the rest.

[MethuenProgressive]

8. I wonder what NH will vote on today?

:kick:

[rucky]

9. Richardson, hands down on experience

Even the bottiest of bots have to see that. But for some reason, people (including Hillary) think "experience" and "change" are mutually exclusive. I think they're just soured on insiders, and the ones who aren't are going for the Clinton - which makes Richardson crowded-out by celebrity.

[MethuenProgressive]

12. Biden/Richardson - there's a winning ticket!

Biden was 'crowded out by celebrity,' too.

[Quixote1818]

10. Judgment over experience. Bush and Cheney had plenty of experience

Big fucking deal.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

11. Looks like the first guy coulnd't find anyting he was good at

seriously, "moving around" too much can look bad.