Is 8 years as a state senator not adequate "experience"?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:46:49 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  Is 8 years as a state senator not adequate "experience"?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Is 8 years as a state senator not adequate "experience"?  (Read 1855 times)
Jacobtm
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,216


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 12, 2008, 11:18:52 AM »

People tend to talk about Obama like all he's ever done was run for senate, then run for president. The claim is that Barack Obama has too little experience in government, and that being a good speaker doesn't mean you have the ability to work within the frame of a real-life government to enact change. Though, isn't Illinois a state commonly known for its rough partisan politics? As such, wouldn't 8 years in its state senate have given Obama a good deal of experience in dealing with that sort of thing?

People tend to think of state legislatures as some kind of insignificant joke on the national stage, but it's not as if being a legislature affecting the lives of some 12 million people is a job that allows you to sit around all day and eat free lunches.

It's possible he didn't do much in the Illinois Senate, I don't know his record, but it seems like 8 years dealing with state politics should be counted as something.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2008, 11:32:49 AM »

"Experience" is just a stupid buzzword used to attack people that aren't controlled by establishment lobbyists. If you go through the list of presidents and their experience upon entering office, you'll see that the time one has spent in government has no bearing on how successful one will be in office.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,308
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2008, 11:34:01 AM »

Yes, but Hillary Clinton has more years in the Senate than he does and 8 years as First Lady.

There's a difference between a state legislature and Congress. Wider issues, much bigger budgets.

Note also that Obama was not seriously electorally tested in his Illinois Senate run (I don't know about his state legislature results). His opponents all had scandals.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2008, 12:31:12 PM »

"Experience" is just a stupid buzzword used to attack people that aren't controlled by establishment lobbyists.
Actually, in this case it's mostly a code word for "Aryan Race".
Logged
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,983
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2008, 12:31:36 PM »

If your state legislature is anything like ours, serving 8 years in it should possibly be a disqualifer for higher office.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2008, 12:32:19 PM »


Note also that Obama was not seriously electorally tested in his Illinois Senate run (I don't know about his state legislature results). His opponents all had scandals.

he was a massive underdog in the Democratic primary.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,308
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2008, 12:35:25 PM »


Note also that Obama was not seriously electorally tested in his Illinois Senate run (I don't know about his state legislature results). His opponents all had scandals.

he was a massive underdog in the Democratic primary.

Yeah, but his opponent faced domestic abuse allegations.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2008, 12:36:20 PM »

Given the mistake we made the current president and his lack of any experience, I feel like some experience is necessary...and I'm not sure how Illinois' legislative sessions are done, but I think 8 years just isn't enough...sure maybe he has some domestic policy experience, but I just don't know if his 3 or so years in the senate makes up for it.

But perhaps he has other qualities which will, and should likely, make him infinitely better than the dope in chief
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,308
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2008, 12:38:58 PM »

Given the mistake we made the current president and his lack of any experience, I feel like some experience is necessary...and I'm not sure how Illinois' legislative sessions are done, but I think 8 years just isn't enough...sure maybe he has some domestic policy experience, but I just don't know if his 3 or so years in the senate makes up for it.

But perhaps he has other qualities which will, and should likely, make him infinitely better than the dope in chief

President Bush spent six years as Governor of Texas- and was re-elected with 69% of the vote.
Logged
Kushahontas
floating_to_sea
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,627
Kenya


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2008, 12:41:53 PM »

If your state legislature is anything like ours, serving 8 years in it should possibly be a disqualifer for higher office.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2008, 12:44:40 PM »


Note also that Obama was not seriously electorally tested in his Illinois Senate run (I don't know about his state legislature results). His opponents all had scandals.

he was a massive underdog in the Democratic primary.

Yeah, but his opponent faced domestic abuse allegations.
One of six. Granted, Blair Hull was considered the early frontrunner, but he ended up coming third. Obama just rose out of nowhere with some important endorsements and a great debate performance to take a wholly unexpected 53% of the vote.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,308
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2008, 12:46:10 PM »


Note also that Obama was not seriously electorally tested in his Illinois Senate run (I don't know about his state legislature results). His opponents all had scandals.

he was a massive underdog in the Democratic primary.

Yeah, but his opponent faced domestic abuse allegations.
One of six. Granted, Blair Hull was considered the early frontrunner, but he ended up coming third. Obama just rose out of nowhere with some important endorsements and a great debate performance to take a wholly unexpected 53% of the vote.

Yeah, but there's still a difference between a Democratic primary and a general.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2008, 12:46:52 PM »


Note also that Obama was not seriously electorally tested in his Illinois Senate run (I don't know about his state legislature results). His opponents all had scandals.

he was a massive underdog in the Democratic primary.

Yeah, but his opponent faced domestic abuse allegations.
One of six. Granted, Blair Hull was considered the early frontrunner, but he ended up coming third. Obama just rose out of nowhere with some important endorsements and a great debate performance to take a wholly unexpected 53% of the vote.

Yeah, but there's still a difference between a Democratic primary and a general.
Obviously - you won't see that kind of dynamic in a general election.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,308
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 12, 2008, 12:50:42 PM »
« Edited: January 12, 2008, 12:53:12 PM by Ivan Smirnov »

What has Obama actually done in the Senate anyway?

While we're on the subject, why was the guy being called Barack J Obama in 2004?
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: January 12, 2008, 12:55:00 PM »

Given the mistake we made the current president and his lack of any experience, I feel like some experience is necessary...and I'm not sure how Illinois' legislative sessions are done, but I think 8 years just isn't enough...sure maybe he has some domestic policy experience, but I just don't know if his 3 or so years in the senate makes up for it.

But perhaps he has other qualities which will, and should likely, make him infinitely better than the dope in chief

President Bush spent six years as Governor of Texas- and was re-elected with 69% of the vote.

If I recall correctly, and I also remember the point being made during the 2000 campaign, that as governors go, the Governor of Texas does very little and has far fewer responsibilities compared to other governors.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: January 12, 2008, 12:55:26 PM »

What has Obama actually done in the Senate anyway?

From his wiki page:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Typo, I guess? the H and J keys are right next to each other.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,308
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: January 12, 2008, 12:56:35 PM »

What has Obama actually done in the Senate anyway?

From his wiki page:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Typo, I guess? the H and J keys are right next to each other.


OK, anything that has dramatically changed things?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: January 12, 2008, 01:00:05 PM »

OK, anything that has dramatically changed things?

Of course not. But then the same is true of the vast majority of Senators and Congresscritters.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 12, 2008, 01:01:16 PM »

OK, anything that has dramatically changed things?

Of course not. But then the same is true of the vast majority of Senators and Congresscritters.
...including Hilary Clinton.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,308
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 12, 2008, 01:01:51 PM »

OK, anything that has dramatically changed things?

Of course not. But then the same is true of the vast majority of Senators and Congresscritters.

So, the whole bunch remains awful. At least Johnson was Majority Leader.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 12, 2008, 01:06:11 PM »

OK, anything that has dramatically changed things?

Why ask this question? How has Hillary, Edwards, Guiliani, Romney, Huckabee, any of them 'dramatically changed things'? You're holding Obama up to a higher standard for no reason at all.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: January 12, 2008, 01:09:48 PM »

OK, anything that has dramatically changed things?

Of course not. But then the same is true of the vast majority of Senators and Congresscritters.
...including Hilary Clinton.

I thought that that went without saying Wink
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: January 12, 2008, 01:18:25 PM »

I must admit the lack of experience on the part of Obama was the casting die in determining my endorsement Democratic and, indeed, presidential endorsement. In all honesty, however, it's difficult to conceive either Clinton or Obama, one of whom will be the 2008 Democratic nominee, as being as woeful a president George W Bush has been.

My ultimate concern with Obama boils down to this. Should he win the Democratic nomination and go on to win the presidency, it will, in no small part, boil down to high expectations. And should Obama fail to deliver on these expectations, then he could fall as quickly as he rose 4 years down the line

I understand where you're coming from, but you're assuming Hillary would win this first election Tongue

She definitely has a strong chance, yes, but with conservatives so strong in their hatred for her, they would show up to the voting booth in droves. This would also heavily affect lower-ballot races, especially in more conservative areas. I would not be suprised at all if Hillary causes many moderate and swing-state Democrats to lose reelection.
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,139
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: January 12, 2008, 01:34:49 PM »

If your state legislature is anything like ours, serving 8 years in it should possibly be a disqualifer for higher office.

fortunately or unfortunately, the Texas legislature is routinely ranked as one of the worst in the nation.

Also, Obama was president of  the Harvard Law Review, and if that's not good experience I don't know what is.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: January 12, 2008, 01:36:08 PM »

OK, anything that has dramatically changed things?

Of course not. But then the same is true of the vast majority of Senators and Congresscritters.

So, the whole bunch remains awful. At least Johnson was Majority Leader.

Not the whole bunch, just a majority. There could 49 really great Senators, and they couldn't get anything good passed (even 50 really great Senators, with this VP).
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 13 queries.