I think experience is necessary, not sufficient.

[BzaDem]

I don't think campaigns should simply be based on the length of candidates' resumes.

But I think there is a certain minimum amount of experience you should have before you run for the toughest job in the country. Obama was a state senator just 3 years ago. His small federal experience in the Senate almost completely overlaps with his presidential campaign.

I see lots of Obama supporters say experience isn't everything, and I agree. But does anyone really think that there is no minimum experience that candidates should have before they run for president? Or do you just think Obama has met this criteria?

Also, how do you think it will play out in the GE? In the democratic primary, change is certainly trumping experience in poll after poll. But when the electorate is expanded to include Republicans and Independents, do you think Republicans are going to be successful in attacking Obama's experience?

[Johnny__Motown]

1. Nixon had lots of experience....

and look how that turned out

[thoughtcrime1984]

2. and what is Hillary's experience exactly- the whole 35 years?

Uh, board of Wal-Mart, married to Bill, niner.....trailing off

[Nitrogenica]

3. Hillary's experience vs Obama's experience is splitting hairs.

McCain is the experience candidate.

We need to show why experience is not all that determines who's fit to lead us.

[CoffeeCat]

4. Our system of government....

...is a broken, corrupt, mess--and I would not trust most politicians who have been
there for more than 10 years to be President.

That's too much time to be corrupted, bought-and-paid-for and to be aligned with
the corporate, bloodsucking jerks who are destroying this country. Either you're
playing the game or you speak out like a mofo. We rarely see the later--except
in a few Dems--so it's safe to say that most of them are corrupt beyond repair.

In my opinion, it's best to have someone who has learned the ropes--and who has
been around the block a few times, but not so many times that they're jaded and
corrupted by the system.

Obama is highly respected in DC. He is not an inside player, and he stayed "above
the fray." He was very frustrated by how difficult it was to get things done
and how slowly the wheels turned. In my estimation, he thinks DC needs an overhaul, and
he ran when he was new--because he felt knowledgeable enough about the issues
and bright enough to change the system. Obama was urged to run by Senate stalwarts
(Ted Kennedy, Daschle, Durbin, etc), who were blown over by his grace, intelligence
and skills.

I think Obama's experience level is just right. He was a State Senator, an attorney,
a community organizer who galvanized tens of thousands of people and made change happen
by inspiring others. Furthermore, he was a Constitutional Law professor for ten years.
He knows the Constitution inside and out and he is adamant about respecting it and repairing
the damage Bush has done to it--restoring Habeas, closing Guantanamo and ending illegal wiretaps.

Obama's experience level is perfect and exactly what our nation needs at this time. We
don't need entrenched, corporatist, go-alongs who feel that they are entitled because they've
"done their time."

[ginchinchili]

5. Wow, that's so racist.

I'm just kidding. I've gotten some of that, and racist I certainly am not. After tonight I can now say I've been called both extremes, which is probably a good place to be.

Yes, my main complaint about Obama is his lack of experience. There are a few other aspects about the man that I've seen during this campaign that contribute to my reluctance to support him. I'm increasingly finding him to be manipulative. Some may argue that in these times it's necessary to win elections, and that may be true, but that approach won't win my vote. I had enough of that from Bush when he'd wave his Rovian wand to cajole the masses. I like knowing exactly who it is behind the curtain.

When I listened to Barack Obama speak at the 2004 convention I thought, I'm watching a future president. I figured on being a strong supporter in 2012 or 2016. When he announced that he was running in 2008 I was very disappointed and, for me, it called his judgment into question. He now gives me the feeling that he's playing us for fools. And I don't like being called a racist when I dare to venture outside of the limited acceptable boundaries of criticism pre-approved by the Obamians. Again, it smacks of karl rove tactics. I hope Democrats don't soon find themselves being called neolibs.

I thank God for rare, free-thinking minds like yours. I like your posts and respect your courage.