Reply to It's Hard to Take You Seriously

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "It's Hard to Take You Seriously"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=TheManWithAUsername][quote=takoma]I'm really dubious of the "qualified on paper" criterion.[/quote]
I'm not saying it's always that important. I used the phrase to bring some small amount of objectivity to the idea of "qualified." For "on paper," I'm thinking basically of relevant experience, preferably with some success. The voters do want that, BTW, judging from the fact that each of the 7 presidents elected before Obama had been a governor or a VP.

[quote=takoma]Unlike many people, I would consider community organizer a reasonable part of a president's background, since it schooled him in the needs of a portion of society highly in need of the government's recognition.  And study of Constitutional law is another item on the resume that I would consider useful.[/quote]
I think those are fine, but far from important. Giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming that he wanted to accomplish more than he has, I think some of Obama's experiences hurt him by helping convince him that he can get everybody to work together because they'll be too much in awe of him to remember to fight. He didn't keep trying to work with the Reps because he's stupid.

[quote=takoma]In case I'm drowning my point in words, I'm trying to say that anything in one's past can contribute to either success or failure in such a complex position, and most likely both at the same time, depending on who is judging.[/quote]
At the extremes of those statements, sure. If Bush had been less effective, his presidency would have been far better. But more experience in related positions will almost certainly make a president more effective in forwarding his or her agenda.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics