Why is Obama's experience seen as less substantial than John Edward's?

Question

Obama was in the State legislature of Illinois for 7 years, and is a current Senator of the same state. Edwards was a trial lawyer and one term senator from North Carolina that ran an unsuccessful bid for VP in 2004. Neither resume jumps off the page as Presidential, but why single out Obama for his weak experience.

Answer 1

Racism. They can't say he's just not "qualified" so they play up his inexperience. Age-ism. He's 7 years younger than Edwards. Ignorance. His community work and work as a constitutional law professor are good qualifications for public office and should be counted.

Answer 2

whilst i ought to easily vote for any of those 3 persons, i'm for Hillary first, Edwards 2d, Obama final. i might truly like a Hillary/Edwards group. Obama has very lots of community based journey and that impresses me even nevertheless he's purely too eco-friendly. i might go with to maintain my vote for him for yet another election, years down the line. For the 1st time later on i don't experience that a vote for any of them is a vote against somebody else, or the lesser of two evils. so some distance as i'm worried, Hillary replaced into the correct consultant to bill and that i doubt that any decision of considerable magnitude replaced into made with out her having a significant portion of it. i think of she brings a different attitude to the interest and that she has the brains, journey, and management characteristics to make an marvelous president. does not harm which you will possibly get a 2-fer - she's a kit manage bill.

Answer 3

Isn't that like using a double negative in a sentence? The result is the opposite of what you intended?

Neither of them have "experience" if that is what you are looking for.

But I would ask, what experience you would be hoping for that would qualify a person for the job of President?

If memory and history serve, you have had govenors, senators, attorney generals, generals and all kinds of people with supposedly great credentials get the job of President.

Few of them ever live up to their billing.

Maybe we should look at different criteria now huh? Maybe we should look for people that have NO experience in the arenas you normally look for a candidate in.

An undegreed person that has worked an hourly job for 30 years seems to have as much potential to handle the job at least as well as 95% of those that were more "qualified".

Seriously...

Answer 4

For that matter, why do people think that Fred Thompson has better experience than Obama?

Or Guiliani? If being a mayor is such great experience for a presidential candidate why have we elected a former mayor as president in close to a century?

Answer 5

Is there a Democratric candidate that has experience? How many Democrats have run a nation under siege from terrorists, hit by massive hurricaines and other national desasters? I do not think there is a candidate with the experience needed to bring this nation back to safety. We need to amend the Constitution and Allow BUSH TO HOLD A 3RD TERM

Answer 6

To tell the truth, I thought Edwards was a weak candidate in 2004 and still is. Obama is equally weak, just not as rich.

Answer 7

Put simply. the answer to your question is that Obama is seen as more of a threat than Edwards. So they attack him more.

Answer 8

I have not heard anyone say Mr. Edwards is more qualified. I think they are both political light weights.

Answer 9

neither one has sufficient experience! There are too many unanswered questions re; the new kid on the political block and this unnerves a lot of people!

Answer 10

I don't think that Obama's experience is less substantial that John Edwards'. I think Obama's inexperienced and Edwards is just another empty suit, ambulance-chasing shyster.