Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jefelump
The difference between Clinton and Obama is that Clinton held the position of Governor. Whether or not you feel he did a good job, at least he did SOMETHING. He was the head of the executive branch of the state government. That is an accomplishment in and of itself. He wasn't a "newbie" when he took the Oath of Office to be POTUS. Tell me what Obama has done that in your opinion qualifies him to be President. Please give me at least ONE legitimate reason to vote for him. And when I say "legitimate", I mean something not related to his party affiliation, race, religion, or ability to speak.
|
We could, I imagine, start a lengthy conversation about what "qualifies" a man to be the POTUS. I'm not sure either of us would ever get the best of it. More often than not (every time there is not an incumbent), we elect a man who has no experience on the job. You yourself may deem that experience as the head of the executive branch of a state government qualifies you, but that leaves out guys like Kennedy and Eisenhower. In short, there doesn't seem to be any one tried-and-true formula for presidential success.
And I might add that Bush did a fantastic job of running the Texas government but a lot of folks seem to disapprove of the job he has done as the leader of the US government.
So when you ask for a justification of why Obama deserves to be deemed an acceptable candidate for POTUS, I would tend to ask what exactly it is you are looking for.