Do Clinton supporters realize that about half the field was more qualified than her?

[FlyingTiger]

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]

1. Do BO supporters realize that BO is not qualified at all? They

should, he hasn't done anything.

[mkultra]

4. hes served in elected roles longer than she has.

[democrattotheend]

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]

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]

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]

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]

49. Illinois ethics reform is a bit of a joke -(I grew up there) - but OK - mark that as

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]

29. You are relying on that DEBUNKED curculating email-which originated for KOS

[democrattotheend]

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]

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]

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]

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]

15. Exactly. He has done diddly squat. He is a total Fraud and

less qualified than Bush.

[Hugabear]

32. "Obama is less qualified than Bush"

Please tell me you don't really believe that.

[Beacool]

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]

47. Facts don't require belief or Kool-Aid

[izzybeans]

37. Is he younger than 35 and foreign born?

What arbitrary qualifications do you have for the job?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

2. Good point.

[mkultra]

3. if you consider only a hillary run, it is weak, BUT...

a Billary run is very powerful.

[bilgewaterbill]

5. Money, name recognition, gender....do you really want more?

Or did you just want to take a shot at Hillary?

[FlyingTiger]

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]

9. You already knew the reasons.

[FlyingTiger]

10. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here.

.

[slinkerwink]

11. those aren't good reasons to vote for someone

[bilgewaterbill]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

17. And hilary's still whinging...she should

be grateful she got this far with her lies and disingenous bullshit.

[splat]

18. Keep it up -- then explain to Obama why the Hillary Dems won't vote for him ever

[emilyg]

19. Yep.

[rodeodance]

30. so much of DU Obama fans act like school-yard bullies

[democrattotheend]

38. Keep what up?

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]

41. if hillary Dem's wont vote dem than

they aren't Dem's any more are they.

[Beacool]

44. You got that right!!!!!!!

I rather vote for a potted plant.

[Forkboy]

48. Don't blame your foolish decisions on others.

[dkf]

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]

22. It seems to have taught her to hire all the wrong people n/t

[ProgressiveMuslim]

24. My thoughts exactly. A different Sec'y of State each year, perhaps?nt

[BzaDem]

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]

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]

28. Dick Cheney

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]

54. Tell that to Abe Lincoln. n/t

[Bicoastal]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

55. you beat me to it. O was literally the least qualified out of the entire dem field. nt

[Tom Rinaldo]

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]

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]

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]

50. Because her experience comes from how Bill let her run the country during his terms.

Didn't you know?

[woolldog]

53. Ah yes, but Biden was never First Lady.

So his experience isn't as impressive...