The Venerable Bogatir X wrote:Crow's post pretty much hits the mark, regardless:
Hill/Bill is coming back.
Ccrow is spouting the line on Obama that all Republicans who aren't prepared to admit the 2000's were a disaster still spout. There aren't many of them left, but they're out there. McCain was a charismatic guy with a great resume, but was stuck with the Bush legacy, chose a terrible running mate, and campaigned badly.
People didn't turn out for Obama because he was dumb black guy who didn't know anything. If dumb but demographically appealing was enough, Vice President Palin would be fundraising for 2016 right now.
I'm rooting hard against Hilary. Having a Clinton or Bush in the White House for that much time is not good for the country.
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
Grandpa's Spells wrote:
People didn't turn out for Obama because he was dumb black guy who didn't know anything.
Of course not, but they didn't turn out for oodles of substance and experience, either.
They did turn out for a remarkably slick social media campaign, the first time out. Also, they turned out to vote against the 'mean' old white guy who probably gave Eastwood the "GET OFF MY LAWN" line. The second time out was cruise control with no real competition in the way. I did use my vote to vote against Him both times.
Remember this one? Even The One Himself loved it when it first came out:
The Venerable Bogatir X wrote:Crow's post pretty much hits the mark, regardless:
Hill/Bill is coming back.
Ccrow is spouting the line on Obama that all Republicans who aren't prepared to admit the 2000's were a disaster still spout. There aren't many of them left, but they're out there. McCain was a charismatic guy with a great resume, but was stuck with the Bush legacy, chose a terrible running mate, and campaigned badly.
Eh? McCain's resume wasn't great-- he was a Senator with limited government leadership experience. His campaign wasn't fantastic (especially not preparing Palin properly), but his own party's initial rejection of TARP was what did him in.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule
[quote="Turdacious"McCain's resume wasn't great-- he was a Senator with limited government leadership experience. [/quote]
This seems to be a modern "Decider" standard of qualification. Unless you mean governorships, which are arguably small-ball leadership in most states, Senate experience is a common route to the Presidency. Outside of a H.W. Bush, there haven't been a lot more recent candidates more qualified on paper.
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
Turdacious wrote:McCain's resume wasn't great-- he was a Senator with limited government leadership experience.
This seems to be a modern "Decider" standard of qualification. Unless you mean governorships, which are arguably small-ball leadership in most states, Senate experience is a common route to the Presidency. Outside of a H.W. Bush, there haven't been a lot more recent candidates more qualified on paper.
Executive leadership is executive leadership, and it gives you something to put on your presidential resume that more reasonably translates to presidential leadership than anything else. Bubba, W, Reagan, and Carter all had it. The position allows them to reasonably take credit for things far more than a Senator can (even if the successes weren't the result of their policies). It's why Jeb and Walker are frontrunners this time, and why O'Malley should be taken far more seriously as a legit contender.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule
Turdacious wrote:McCain's resume wasn't great-- he was a Senator with limited government leadership experience.
This seems to be a modern "Decider" standard of qualification. Unless you mean governorships, which are arguably small-ball leadership in most states, Senate experience is a common route to the Presidency. Outside of a H.W. Bush, there haven't been a lot more recent candidates more qualified on paper.
Executive leadership is executive leadership, and it gives you something to put on your presidential resume that more reasonably translates to presidential leadership than anything else. Bubba, W, Reagan, and Carter all had it. The position allows them to reasonably take credit for things far more than a Senator can (even if the successes weren't the result of their policies). It's why Jeb and Walker are frontrunners this time, and why O'Malley should be taken far more seriously as a legit contender.
McCain didn't make Admiral, but he held repeated commands in the Navy and he championed some key pieces of legislature in areas core to what goes on.
My biggest thing with both Palin and Obama was the sheer lack of experience. W too, really.
Hillary actually has an incredible resume. Slept with the President (OK, maybe), worked as a cabinet member for the President, Senator for NY. She has the kind of resume that I wish more candidates had. Oh well...
nafod wrote:McCain didn't make Admiral, but he held repeated commands in the Navy and he championed some key pieces of legislature in areas core to what goes on.
My biggest thing with both Palin and Obama was the sheer lack of experience. W too, really.
Please explain to me how McCain's experience compares to being a multi-time private sector executive and being twice elected leader of the 14th largest economy in the world. His electoral history was much more impressive too (and it was more impressive simply by beating Ann Richards). Having a leadership position in a bureaucracy is different than having accomplishments running one. To put it in perspective-- Santorum's Senatorial resume is more impressive than McCain's (so is his electoral history).
nafod wrote:Hillary actually has an incredible resume. Slept with the President (OK, maybe), worked as a cabinet member for the President, Senator for NY. She has the kind of resume that I wish more candidates had. Oh well...
But what are her accomplishments in those positions? O'Malley's 2004 resume dwarfs the combined resumes of Hillary and Warren.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule
