Quote:
I'm talking about elements of Obama's experience - do you think experience is not relevant, or that my points do not address his experience?
I would infer that you think experience is a detriment, but I'd like to hear what you actually think.
|
Certainly experience is relevant, at least to a certain point. Hillary Clinton and John McCain's "experience" didn't give them the wisdom to oppose the Iraq war back in 2003, when it would have made a difference.
Mainly, though, I'm curious why you think Hillary has more experience than Obama. In my opinion, being the spouse of a governor/president does not entitle one to claim that as their own experience. When it comes to experience in terms of number of years spent serving in elected office, it's as follows:
Clinton: 8 years in the US senate
Obama: 4 years in the US senate, 8 years in the Illinois state senate
At best you could argue they have relatively equal amounts of political experience (if you assume that Hillary's federal experience is more "valuable" than Obama's two terms in the state legislature), but then you get back to my earlier point that federal experience can't be that much of a difference-maker since neither Ronald Reagan nor Bill Clinton had any federal experience at all prior to becoming president.