The Experience Argument is not Dead! We will still have to fight that battle!

[kennetha]

Commentators and Bloggers and folks on DU are breathlessly saying that McCain has given away the experience argument. But think again. Think, for example, of Bush/Quayle vs. Dukakis/Bentsen. Bentsen did not save Dukakis's rear on the question of readiness to be Commander in Chief. Bentsen might have looked good in a tank, but that wouldn't have saved Dukakis's tail either. And Quayle's complete unreadiness did nothing to undermine Bush's standing as a former ambassador, former head of CIA, former Vice President.

It's the same here. We've got an inexperienced head of the ticket and a highly experienced VP. They've got a highly experienced head of the ticket with a highly inexperienced VP. Palin's inexperience doesn't detract from the side by side comparison between the two heads. Biden's experience doesn't compensate for that same comparison.

So don't count on McCain to surrender the experience argument at all -- no more than Bush the First did when he chose Dan Quayle or when Dukakis chose Bentsen.

[EndElectoral]

1. The Rethugs MADE the experience argument. Ready to Lead. They now look like hypocrites.

[kennetha]

2. How so?

[damonm]

9. If you can't see it,

There's not much sense explaining the screamingly obvious to you.

But I'll try anyway.

1) Rethugs say "Obama has no experience" in spite of 10 years in the Illinois Legislature, and 2&1/2 years in the US Senate, serving on the Foreign Relations Committee.

2) Rethugs plan to place 2-year Alaska governor who has held NO other elective office and has NO knowledge of foreign affairs one heartbeat away from the Presidency under a 73-year-old with a history of Cancer, who (as a former POW), according to medical statistics, is likely to die prematurely.

Now, how do they say "don't vote for obama because he has no experience", when they themselves put someone with even LESS experience a heartbeat away from the Presidency?

Further, between the Dairy farm and HER "troopergate", she doesn't even have the argument of good judgement to fall back on, as Obama does.

[NYC Liberal]

10. This quote:

"But the vice president of the United States is a key and important issue and must add in carrying out the responsibilities as president of the United States."

He can't now argue that he thinks the VP isn't important. Since he has said it's a VERY important issue, then why would he pick someone so inexperienced.

[ebdarcy]

3. We do not have an inexperienced head of the ticket.

[clevbot]

4. exactly

[Danger Mouse]

5. Yes, it does take it off the table, because if McCain croaks...

the president will be a first-term governor with only two years of experience and NO national experience.
If McCain were younger and healthier, this would not be an issue, but given his age and his health, it WILL be. Conservative pundits are ALREADY grumbling about her.
You'll see more of it.

[OmahaBlueDog]

6. Obviously, John McCain doesn't see years of Washington experience as important, based on his VP

..especially since he's 72, and has had cancer twice that we know of, she's statistically very likely to become President.

Every question she's asked should remind people not of her experience, but of McCain's age. When that phone rings at 3AM, do you want Joe or Sarah?

[elkston]

7. More anti-Obama concern from you.

The difference:

Time and time again Obama's JUDGMENT means he is serious about running this country.

McCain picked this woman because he took a chance that it might create a win, discarding the political realities ONCE they get in office.

Obama picked Biden because he knew first and foremost, he was someone who could step right up and be President.

McCain, per his personality, is taking wild swings and unnecessary risks.

Obama is holding steady and making sensible LEADERSHIP decisions.

[kennetha]

8. Jeepers! You can't even recognize objective analysis when you see it.

My point is that it would be folly to think that McCain has given up on the experience argument by this pick. I said nothing about whether it's a good or bad argument, whether we have a rebuttal to that argument.
The point is that it does not take the argument of the table -- as in making it impossible for McCain to even THINK about raising the argument.

You can't defeat your enemy unless you objectively assess what's in the arsenal of your enemy, what moves he/she will try to make. Which ones are good moves, which ones are bad moves, etc.

[damonm]

11. This is NOT objective, and that's the problem.

It takes the inexperience argument totally off the table, unless the GOP doesn't care about the blatant hypocrisy of doing so.

Your Bush/Quayle argument holds no water because George H.W. Bush was (a) a sitting VP, and (b) NOT a 73-year-old with a history of cancer, nor was he a physically damaged former POW who medical statistics say is likely to die prematurely.

[kennetha]

15. You may or may not agree with my analysis

But the fact that you disagree doesn't make it non-objective. I might be wrong. The analogy might be a poor one. You could argue that. But dismissing an attempt at objective analysis of the question whether the experience argument is really off the table and whether it still deserves a counter argument as "anti-Obama" shows what psychologists call "confirmation bias" on your part. That's when you dismiss anything that goes against an already firmly held belief or opinion as false and irrelevant and dismiss the source of that argument or evidence as itself somehow biased or evil or whatever.

[elkston]

12. OK, sorry. But consider this.

Obama has more experience making decisions that actually effect a larger number of constituents.

8 years in Illinois state legislature, rep. Chicago districts.
3 years in U.S. Sentae rep. Illinois

Versus several years small time mayor
not even 2 years as governor
and both in ALASKA

Obama has more experience working with people in government (state and national) to get things done.

[Heather MC]

13. WE HAVE TO DROP THE THINKING THAT OBAMA LACKS "EXPERIENCE"

That is a Right wing talkingpoint nothing more
An inexperience man would not have been able to put together the team he did that helped him defeat the Clinton Legacy.

Can we not Repeat RW talkingpoints as facts on DU

[WeDidIt]

14. McCain threw that argument under the bus

then backed up over it.

Twice.

It's Jed, Dim.