do these people realize that their "hero" of a president now never held an office in washington before he was elected president? is this just another excuse for the conservatives to find to not like somebody?
2007-01-16 05:26:25 · 11 answers · asked by 2010 CWS Champs! 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Neocon spam nothing more. The Neocons have ruined their party with hate tactics, and still don't have clue, so just allow them to ramble on.
2007-01-16 05:54:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 1⤋
Besides being older when he ran for president, Bush was elected governor of Texas twice. He served a total of six years (less one month). Mr. Obama will have almost exactly half the experience of President Bush, not to mention the fact that serving as governor is better training for the presidency than being a junior senator from a tiny state.
Instead of attempting to refute negatives for his candidacy, perhaps you should find something in the postivie.
"Well, why shouldn't he be the president?" is not a great way to reason this out.
2007-01-19 15:06:18 · answer #2 · answered by Biggg 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Look at history, friend, a great many presidents went from being a governor to president. The assumption is that if they can manage a state government they have the experience to manage the country's government.
2007-01-16 13:33:40 · answer #3 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe because it's true? Compared to Bush, Obama is a minor league player when it comes to political experience.
I find it hard to believe that a first-term Senator who took office only 4 years ago thinks he has even a slight chance of getting elected.
I won't vote for him, that's for sure.
2007-01-16 13:35:04 · answer #4 · answered by Team Chief 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bush was Governor of Texas. Obama was a state Senator in Illlinois. That's a big difference. Had he been Illinois Governor, I think the perception of him would be much stronger.
I don't not like him, I just don't know enough about him. I know he's a pro-choicer, so that's a negative in my book.
I really don't care about his racial or ethnic makeup, at all.
2007-01-16 13:33:48 · answer #5 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
My concern is that Obama has never held a position where he actually had to run a government.
How many Presidents have there been who were never governors?
2007-01-16 13:40:20 · answer #6 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What we have got now sure does not. I think people look for excuses not to like him. No one has experience for president until they have actual been president. Right? Right.
.
2007-01-16 13:32:31 · answer #7 · answered by Sugar 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
For accuracy's sake, please don't put words in our mouths. Most of us are talking executive experience (i.e. Mayor, Governor), or serious legislative experience (Committee leadership, legislation sponsorship, etc) or administration experience (Cabinet position, etc) or even civilian leadership, such as company president.
He has none of these things, unlike Bush or Clinton who were both governors. All he has is personality and a book. It's not enough. He's a political novice, a rookie.
2007-01-16 13:39:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush political resume at the time he was elected FAR exceeded the nominal things Barack Hussein Obama has ever accomplished.
2007-01-16 13:30:38 · answer #9 · answered by Chicken Jones 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because they don't know any better, and these are the same people who keep calling him Obama bin Laden.
2007-01-16 13:32:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
even people who don't support bush admit hussein obama has no experience
quit robotripping and learn a thing or two, idiot
2007-01-16 13:30:12 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋