I was responding to a comment left on my blogpost, and had a subsequent email conversation with a friend that made me wonder, if the presidency was a job posting, what would the "qualifications" be?In the comment I referred to above, I stated that...
"Of all the candidates still left on both sides, I'd say the most qualified for the job are probably McCain, Clinton, and then Barack [in that order] if you're basing it on experience. If you're basing it on who your beliefs align with or who makes you feel like you're a part of something larger than just a single person, then that would be Barack."I still think this is a true statement. I won't dare say that Hillary is way more qualified than Barack, but she has more experience still.
However, I have to admit that neither experience nor whose beliefs coincide most closely with yours should be the sole qualifications for the presidency of the U.S. Other things you'd probably want to see are: leadership ability, sincerity (which is tough to gauge), compassion for those less-fortunate, level-headedness, etc. But most of those are actual personality traits. Most times when you apply for a job there are the boiler-plate personality traits that employers expect...works well with others, motivated, organized, etc. We all know those. But if the application was for the presidency, what would the job-specific qualifications be? I'm not sure.
What do you think?
Bonus Coverage: GOP about to bring em out bring em out (no pun intended...see picture above, LOL).
5 comments:
What do we consider experience, being married to the president and making appearences in foreign countries does not count as foreign policy experience. She has one term over Obama in the Senate. A term that has largely been spent pushing legislation that has not been supported across party lines or supported by anyone at all.
Where as if you were to research Obama's bills a large percentage were back by MAJOR players in DC belonging to both parties. Senator Obama may have less time in but his time has been spent making changes and uniting opponents to better this country. Check this link out. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/20/201332/807/36/458633
This is a former Hillary supporter that now supports Obama.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/20/201332/807/36/458633
In case the link in my first comment does not work.
Good points.
I can't debate the minutae of their terms as Senators because I honestly do not have intimate knowledge of what either of them has done. I am just going based on terms served.
I would not want to debate minutia but I found it important to understand the REAL differences. We read articles about stuff that really don't matter I wanted you to get to see some things I felt were eye openning to me.
Definitely check out that dailykos joint it breaks it down nicely.
Oh and please take a look at Hillary's "universal" health care plan and tell me what you think. If you get time.
i don't agree that time served equates to experience...Time magazine did an excellent article on this very topic the week of March 10th...I think you need to look at the record as a.b. stated to look at what has been done while in the senate...and i will NOT count Clinton's time as first lady of the US or AR as experience either....
http://tclarkegolden.blogspot.com/2008/03/politics.html
has several articles that point out some interesting facts, including experience "eighter from decatur"
Post a Comment