Is Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 04:34:44 AM
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 Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Is Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States?
#1
Yes.
 
#2
No.
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 128

Author Topic: Is Sarah Palin qualified to be President of the United States?  (Read 26252 times)
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
« on: August 30, 2008, 03:35:44 AM »

It does not appear that she is.  Palin's resume seems similar to that of Tim Kaine except the state she governs is even smaller.  I was opposed to a Kaine selection by Obama.  She is going to have to do some serious cramming to get up to speed on foreign policy/national security and I just don't think she has the time.  Biden will kill her on this issue during the debates. 
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2008, 03:55:16 AM »

It does not appear that she is.  Palin's resume seems similar to that of Tim Kaine except the state she governs is even smaller.  I was opposed to a Kaine selection by Obama.  She is going to have to do some serious cramming to get up to speed on foreign policy/national security and I just don't think she has the time.  Biden will kill her on this issue during the debates. 
Palin's level of information is not going to be lower than your average voter's.

It doesn't matter.  Voters will see from her biography that she has little background on the issue and if she makes misstatements on foreign policy, the media will make sure people know.  It will reinforce the perception that she is out of her league on national security.  Kaine would have come under the same scrutiny.  It may be worse for Palin because of stereotypes that women candidates are less authoritative on national security.
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2008, 04:01:57 AM »
« Edited: August 30, 2008, 04:05:17 AM by Ogre Mage »

It does not appear that she is.  Palin's resume seems similar to that of Tim Kaine except the state she governs is even smaller.  I was opposed to a Kaine selection by Obama.  She is going to have to do some serious cramming to get up to speed on foreign policy/national security and I just don't think she has the time.  Biden will kill her on this issue during the debates. 
Palin's level of information is not going to be lower than your average voter's.

It doesn't matter.  Voters will see from her biography that she has little background on the issue and if she makes misstatements on foreign policy, the media will make sure people know.  It will reinforce the perception that she is out of her league on national security.  Kaine would have come under the same scrutiny.
Kaine is a Democrat.
If it didn't sink Bush, for chrissakes, it won't hurt a runningmate of McCain's.


U.S. Politics in 2008 is a completely different political environment from 2000, when Bush first ran.  And McCain is 72 years old, so the abilities of his successor are more of a consideration than usual.
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
« Reply #3 on: August 30, 2008, 07:07:47 PM »
« Edited: August 30, 2008, 07:43:33 PM by Ogre Mage »

The fact is Gov. Palin would be a much better President then Sen. Clinton.

Hillary Clinton:

--Received 17.5-18 million votes for President in the Democratic Primary.

--Has been in national politics for 16 years and held a U.S. Senate seat for 8 years in one of the most populous states in the nation.

--Has worked on a wide variety of national issues during those 16 years -- health care, education, adoption, economic initiatives, the environment, national defense issues, disaster relief and women's rights.  Some specific examples include SCHIP, The Adoption and Safe Families Act, FMLA, getting over the counter sales for emergency contraception approved and helping secure $20 billion in disaster relief funds for N.Y. after 9/11.

--Has served on the Senate Armed Services Committee for 6 years and has been praised for her work there by several committee members, including Republicans John Warner and Lindsey Graham.

--Was endorsed by many top military brass during her Presidential campaign.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=6799

--Has visited over 82 countries and met and established relationships with many international leaders.


Sarah Palin:

-- Has been governor of one of the least populous states in the nation for 2 years.  So far, her signature achievement seems to be the ethics reform bill she passed in 2007.  She has almost no foreign policy experience.

Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2008, 07:48:08 PM »

I accidentally omitted the word "of" in this line.  It should have read like this --

--Has been in national politics for 16 years and held a U.S. Senate seat for 8 years in one of the most populous states in the nation.
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2008, 03:10:42 PM »

The fact is Gov. Palin would be a much better President then Sen. Clinton.

Hillary Clinton:

--Received 17.5-18 million votes for President in the Democratic Primary.

Apparently, that's a good reason as to why someone would be a better President.

George W. Bush received three million more votes than John Kerry did in 2004. Do you think he has been a better President than Kerry would have been?


Bush doesn't have anything to do with a comparison of Clinton and Palin.  The votes Clinton received are a measure of how well she was able to persuade people to commit to where she wanted to go as President.  A direct comparison cannot be made with Palin because Palin did not run in the Republican Primary, but her non-participation is not a point in her favor in terms of her readiness for the Presidency.  If Palin ran, I believe she would have been considered a joke.  If you think otherwise, please explain.

Do you think Palin is more qualified to be President that Clinton?  I would like to see how long Sarah would last in a Presidential debate with Hillary.

Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2008, 03:17:03 PM »


Do you think Palin is more qualified to be President that Clinton?  I would like to see how long Sarah would last in a Presidential debate with Hillary.

Hillary Clinton has been a U.S. Senator for six years. Do I think she has more experience? Sure. Is it as much as people make it out to be? No.

I would like to see how long she would last, too. I love how much you people underestimate this woman. Keep doing it.

Hillary Clinton has been a senator for 8 years.  She was elected in 2000.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.039 seconds with 15 queries.