<p>I've probably been too excited following the race for the past few months rooting for the underdog, the young and exciting candidate, and his undeniably gifted rhetoric. Suddenly every respectable media outlet is declaring Obama the Democratic nominee. Most people are saying that McCain didn't have a chance against either Obama or Clinton in this bad year anyway. </p>
<p>So I fastforward to next year: President Barack Obama. 47 years old. Half-term Senator. And I think on in horror. Is he experienced enough to do a good job?!</p>
<p>Freaking no he's not, and all the brainwashed college "voters" (questionable), Democratic party leaders, and the 90-some % of blacks who think the savior has come (apparently haven't looked to hard at what he's done in Chicago). No he cannot cause this vague concept of "change" to come about and fix everything that is bad about politics, especially not when he and his campaign have been employing many such tactics all along, nor can he win Idaho, nor are his 130 abstentions from voting in the Senate particularly promising, nor is his brashness, smugness, arrogance and alienation of key segments of the Democratic party great characteristics in a nominee who's set to take on a fairly centrist jolly old war vet. And his "undeniably gifted rhetoric": freaking BS. thank his speech writers, and esp David Axelrod for lifting all his speech soundbites and moving phrases from other political figures (oftentimes his own former clients). You must not be listening when he's speaking off-script and fills his speech with long pauses, an "ummm" every fifth word, and an overall inability to clearly elucidate his ideas and plans (see: Obama-Clinton debates, which he eventually realized he sucked at and decided to just decline requests for them instead of provide people grounds to doubt his rock star qualities).</p>
<p>For further reading, see: McGovern, Dukakis.</p>
<p>The problem isn't that he isn't experienced. It's that he has no idea what he'll do once he becomes president, assuming he does (which I think he will).</p>
<p>LACtransferhopes: you're a Clinton supporter? :P</p>
<p>
[quote]
The problem isn't that he isn't experienced. It's that he has no idea what he'll do once he becomes president, assuming he does (which I think he will).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yep, come to think of it, if he had a clear prior agenda going in, I wouldn't feel that uncomfortable despite his inexperience.</p>
<p>Experience is so overrated and McCain has proved to be quite distant from the masses especially in terms of Iraq.(A time poll has this as the second most important issue to Americans) On top of that he is an economic ignoramus and seems like he would be uncompromising when negotiating with what the United States calls rogue states. Besides some of our worst presidents have been experienced(Frank Pierce, James Buchanan) While one of our best(Abe Lincoln) had a laughable track record. McCain seems pretty dogmatic to me and that's what experience does its makes you cocky.</p>
<p>Sheed30, what do you mean Clinton's just power-hungry? Could you expound on that? The way I see it, all the candidates are power hungry, even if along with their quest for power comes the desire to help people.</p>
<p>True, all of the candidates are power hungry, but Clinton seems a bit more desperate b/c:</p>
<p>-she cried to woo voters in the NE primaries
-she has tried to reinstate disenfranchised voters in Michigan and Florida, even though the state parties there defied party rules.
-she has started to resort to GOP attacks in some of her earlier tv ads(3 a.m. fear instilling ad, Osama ad before the Pa primary, etc.)
-she has not dropped out yet, even though the numbers are strongly against her.(I think she has every right to stay in the race, though). This could hurt chances of a united party.</p>
<p>basically she has been at odds w/ the Democratic party(more so then Obama), which makes it seem like she would do anything to get the nomination...</p>
<p>
[quote]
-she cried to woo voters in the NE primaries
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're confusing hunger for power with strategy and conniving. Obama is just more subtle: he persuades you with pretty rhetoric, expounds on vague concepts like change and unity, and intentionally does not go into detail on his plans. That's his strategy, and is no less pathetic.</p>
<p>
[quote]
she has tried to reinstate disenfranchised voters in Michigan and Florida, even though the state parties there defied party rules.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Er, any candidate would. Those states are important in delegates. If that had happened to Obama or McCain, he too would be trying to reinstate the votes, even though it's against party rules. Just look at this:</p>
<p>i will agree that mccain has more experience than obama but obama's liberal views certainly outweigh the conservative views of Mccain. If this election were 8 years back, i would vote for Mccain but this is 2008 and with all these dillemmas surrounding us, Obama will have the biggest impact, hopefully for the better. </p>
<p>
[quote]
You're confusing hunger for power with strategy and conniving.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>whatever. desperate times call for desperate measures in her case.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Obama is just more subtle: he persuades you with pretty rhetoric, expounds on vague concepts like change and unity, and intentionally does not go into detail on his plans. That's his strategy, and is no less pathetic.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>far..........far.............far............ stretch comparing the two. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Er, any candidate would
[/quote]
</p>
<p>ahh, the old "everybody would have" argument. did your crystal ball tell you that? you dont know that for a fact.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They all sling mud. That's really nothing new.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>for the most part Obama has kept the slinging to a minimum. </p>
<p>Like I said Your rarely going to be fully comfortable w/ a candidate. I think it boils down to who has screwed up/lied the least..</p>
<p>"Obama is just more subtle: he persuades you with pretty rhetoric, expounds on vague concepts like change and unity, and intentionally does not go into detail on his plans. That's his strategy, and is no less pathetic."</p>
<p>Pretty words are valuable. I don't think he knows much about running a country, but his ability to use his "pretty words" to make people care about issues is more valuable than anything Clinton or McCain offer. </p>
<p>McCain is too old. He's out of touch with simply too many people. </p>
<p>Also, Hillary agreed to not count FL votes until recently, when she realized she needed them. Besides, I have no wish to extend the Bush-Clinton dynasty any further.</p>
<p>Obama does indeed have rather specific solutions to many of the prominent contemporary issues, detailed on his website and in campaign legislation. It's ridiculous to expect him to read his policies line-by-line in his speeches every time. He has had enough speeches detailing his position on many issues, including immigration, the war, and the economy. Too much detail can get repetitive. Instead, when speaking, he adds an emotional, more abstract approach of unity and a hope for a better future. What's wrong with that?</p>
<p>Hillary is honestly quite similar to Obama on the issues with the exception of a few.. but she comes across as much less honest. She has been caught in a few small lies and manipulations here and there, leaving many questioning her integrity.</p>
<p>Mccain is a little...eh... He's a respectable man but not a real great candidate. It's like Bush running for a third term honestly. Same tax cuts for the upper class ($250k+ income, businesses), same war, same belligerent diplomacy...</p>
<p>I think President Bush is a good enough example of where experience means little compared to good judgement.</p>
<p>god p-town sucks obama's c0ck. So many people show up to his stuff and half the cars got like obama stickers. Unfortunate in my opinion. thats my op.
I am conservative, but between the two i would by far chose clinton. Shes a strong woman who knows what she is doing even if i don't agree with her. Obama brings to much incertainty and there is so much controversy around him.</p>
<p>^ hey i don't like her, i am a conservative. But i am sayin shes better than obama. First she is not as far on the spectrum as obama. 2nd she just seems a more experienced (i know cliched, but so is young and fresh) and seems like she would be a stronger person in the white person (maybe too strong, iron lady). Obama is all about attracting people and not too much on concrete issues. The obama carries that whole racial thing with him. Hey i am not being racist, but its true, the race thing has been excalted. Lastly i don't think i have found enough proof to trust that obama can run a country. Clinton may not do what i like, but i am sure she can lead a country.
My 2 cents, not that its worth anything anways.</p>
<p>Obama will be fine/He will hire a competent staff;set high expectations/set a positive tone; How could anything be worse than the last 8 years. I'm looking forward to democracy again and not having to turn the volume off when the president speaks.</p>
<p>
[quote]
First she is not as far on the spectrum as obama
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I have no idea what this means...</p>
<p>
[quote]
2nd she just seems a more experienced
[/quote]
</p>
<p>She seems more experienced....but shes not. </p>
<p>Barrack Obama has served 8 yrs in the Illinois Senate, and is halfway through his first term in the US senate(11 yrs. experience as a senator)</p>
<p>Hilary Clinton is beginning her eighth year as a US senator.(8 yrs. experience as a senator)</p>
<p>But, if you factor in the various committees and chairmanships on various legal boards.....it comes out to about the same, in terms of government experience.</p>
<p>I didnt factor in her time as <em>first lady</em>. After her Bosnia trip flap, its hard to tell how much of it was BS or not.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The obama carries that whole racial thing with him.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>thats not true. Obama has tried to make this race about everything but race. His preachers may disagree, but they dont speak for him.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Lastly i don't think i have found enough proof to trust that obama can run a country.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Its not as much a matter of running a country as it is a matter of fixing a country...</p>