"ready to lead?"

[Sisyphus]

It seems like this is a major meme of the McCain campaign. Every ad about McCain includes the (often non-sequitor) phrase "ready to lead," and every negative ad about Obama includes the phrase "not ready to lead." Every talking head supporting McCain seems to work that into the talking points, as well.

 

Clearly, they're working very hard to work this into the national subconscious, so... what does it mean? McCain obviously has been involved in national politics much longer than Obama. Is that all?

 

In another thread, DoG (sorry to put you on the spot) mentioned that he's not voting for Obama because he's not voting for Obama because he's "not qualified to be President yet." What would he have to do to be deemed "qualified?" Certainly other Presidents have had resumes as sparse as Obama's, including some of our "greatest," like Lincoln.

[bascule]

When Obama has something on the caliber of the Keating Five scandal and a divorce under his belt, then he'll be ready to lead

[DJBruce]

Obama will be ready to lead when he has more political experience than one term in the US Senator and two term State Representative. Right now I feel that Obama needs more experience in the political process and world politics. Also I am not a huge fan of the Pied Piper of Hope act which seems to be Obama's main selling point.

[Sisyphus]

Obama will be ready to lead when he has more political experience than one term in the US Senator and two term State Representative. Right now I feel that Obama needs more experience in the political process and world politics. Also I am not a huge fan of the Pied Piper of Hope act which seems to be Obama's main selling point.

 

That seems very vague. How much more experience?

 

Also, that's only his "main selling point" if you listen to the attack ads. To me his main selling point is the fact that he understands the issues better than his opponent, despite his "inexperience."

[Phi for All]

To me, "experience" in politics is almost synonymous with "playing ball". I think Obama's grasp of the issues makes him more ready to lead than having a bunch of entrenched Beltway Buddies and a history of same old, same old.

 

I'm trying hard not to let some of his stances turn me off, the way I did with Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, but his lack of Washington experience is not anywhere near my biggest concern. My lack of knowledge of his voting habits due to his lack of experience is higher on the list.

[bascule]

Obama will be ready to lead when he has more political experience than one term in the US Senator and two term State Representative.

 

Would a term and a third as Senator be good? Or is being President more of a two terms as Senator deal?

 

Right now I feel that Obama needs more experience in the political process and world politics.

 

What experience would you like him to have which you think would better qualify him as President?

 

When it comes right down to it, I don't think being a Senator is exactly the greatest background for a President. I'd rather see someone who has experience in an executive role, such as a state Governor or corporate CEO. Anyone who doesn't have any experience in such a role is going to have a lot to learn about being the executive for an entire country.

 

However, in this case we have two Senators on our hands. In my opinion McCain really hasn't done anything which would make him more experienced in this capacity.

[CDarwin]

When it comes right down to it, I don't think being a Senator is exactly the greatest background for a President. I'd rather see someone who has experience in an executive role, such as a state Governor or corporate CEO. Anyone who doesn't have any experience in such a role is going to have a lot to learn about being the executive for an entire country.

 

However, in this case we have two Senators on our hands. In my opinion McCain really hasn't done anything which would make him more experienced in this capacity.

 

Experience in the Senate gives you the big advantage of an understanding it's institutional functionings. Former governors often experience a lot of difficulty with Congress because they aren't used to such a strong and active legislative branch. That was Carter's problem.

[Pangloss]

That's true, and Clinton's infamously ugly 1st 100 days would also be a good example of your point, CDarwin. But I happen to agree with bascule, though -- executive experience is seems more useful than senatorial.

 

What I think the word 'experience' may actually mean is something else entirely. Stability, objectivity, critical thinking, calm under pressure, stuff like that.

[bascule]

Former governors often experience a lot of difficulty with Congress [...] That was Carter's problem.

 

I can think of a much better example than Carter...

[DJBruce]

Experience in the Senate gives you the big advantage of an understanding it's institutional functionings. Former governors often experience a lot of difficulty with Congress because they aren't used to such a strong and active legislative branch. That was Carter's problem.

 

This was what I was getting at when I pointed out that McCain knows how congress works and should be able to get things done.

[Phi for All]

This was what I was getting at when I pointed out that McCain knows how congress works and should be able to get things done.

"Get things done"? As in, "ready to lead us in the same direction we've been heading and get things done the way Congress has been doing things"? I don't agree with a lot of things Obama is talking about but I know I don't want same old, same old.

[Pangloss]

I don't agree with a lot of things Obama is talking about but I know I don't want same old, same old.

 

Aren't you just trading one form of propaganda for another? That's the same thing as is this notion that Obama lacks experience.

[Phi for All]

Aren't you just trading one form of propaganda for another? That's the same thing as is this notion that Obama lacks experience.

I haven't seen much to convince me that McCain's "experience" will take the country away from what I deem to be a destructive path. To be honest, I've listened more to McCain speaking than I have Obama, and I'm not exposed to as much propaganda as most people are (I just don't watch a whole lot of TV - I'm commercialphobic). I think he is a capable leader and a very appealing candidate from a certain perspective, and his succinct style plays very well to the masses.

 

I also think the masses are asses who are more concerned with "winning the race" instead of paying attention to what their elected officials are voting for. They come to life every four years to argue about who should "win" leadership of the executive branch while mostly ignoring the legislative, which affects their lives a lot more than who's president. I consider myself to be above the average in political knowledge while fully realizing that I really need to know a great deal more, especially at the state level.

 

To that end, I'm interviewing this week with a company that provides publications and services in a non-partisan format to keep companies and individuals informed about what Congress is doing and encourages them to speak up about issues that are important to them. I'm going independent contractor again, selling commission-only for at least two different companies in an effort to control my own resources and be able to take my own economy with me wherever I go. This is the main reason I'm extremely interested in cutting ties with energy companies, infernal combustion and mega-corps that want to mess with the markets I love so much.

 

"Pay for what works" is my new motto, and I don't see McCain changing much of anything if he's elected, and not just because he's Republican. If McCain had changed parties back in 2001 after talking to Downey and Daschle I'd still feel the same way. While I realize that too much change too swiftly can be detrimental, I don't even think Obama can change our course too swiftly for me.

[Pangloss]

Ah okay, so you've weighed it and come to the general conclusion that McCain will be the same (at least in the categories you're talking about -- I think you would agree with me on some differences if I were to nit-pick) as Bush. Fair enough, I respect that.

 

The funny thing is, I don't entirely disagree with your point. I see McCain as being different, but he's not different enough in the correct categories/subjects. In short, he doesn't "get it" about what went wrong with the Bush administration -- he's lookin' at the wrong stuff.

[Phi for All]

I think McCain *will* be different than Bush, no doubt in my mind. His experience is richer than Bush's and I think he is overall a better politician, even though he shares many neo-conservative beliefs, and I think he's just as clueless as Bush about the economy. McCain's ass puckers when you mention the economy, you can literally see his butt cheeks clench.

 

But mainly he shares a failure to understand too many key issues like diplomacy with an enemy. Telling the Shiites and the Sunnis to "stop the bullshit" tells me he's just another cowboy with too much power and a phrase book full of three-word sound bytes. His work ethic is similar to Bush's too. He's just not around when some really important issues get voted on.

 

I do admit to one prejudice though. I think anyone who has been in Washington long enough owes too many favors to be the kind of effective leader we need in these times. That's one of the reasons Obama appeals to me. And I feel he has a better grasp of diplomacy at a time when we need to be more world conscious.

 

At least I can feel that Obama won't be driven to "win in Iraq" at the cost of a depleted US; after all, he wasn't a member of the Senate Armed Forces committee that was calling for Sadaam Hussein's removal back in 1997. Since that time, McCain has called it wrong on virtually every count except the effectiveness of last year's surge. I'm just not willing to destroy evil by following it to the gates of hell anymore.

[ParanoiA]

Obama has not shown me he's ready to lead. I think that's a more accurate way of putting it, because despite how he tries to insist that "being against the war in Iraq" was tough, he hasn't made any tough decisions that I'm aware of. But we also don't know that he isn't ready to lead us terrifically.

 

That's what more experience gets you - battle scars. He doesn't really have any, so it's difficult to tell if he can lead or not. He can lead with his mouth, we know that. But beyond campaign fluff, let's get real here, what is there to show that if we get in a crisis that he can handle himself like a leader - make tough, unpopular decisions?

 

McCain has shown he can be thoughtful in a crisis. He's shown he can make decisions despite the backlash, like from a public not privvy to the details. Obama is so plurally devoted, I'm not sure he could take a position that doesn't blow in the direction of the wind.

 

Just my two cents. Obama is too many things to too many people and is way too guarded and cautious for me trust in leadership. I think that's why the McCain camp is going that direction with their ads - exploiting his tactic of moving to the center.