Who is the LEAST qualified Democratic candidate for president?
If we all agree that experience and qualifications are important, how would you rate these in order regardless of their name, sex, ethnic background, looks, or ability to raise money. (assuming their platform is the same)
1. The one with only two years experience in congress? 2. The one whose spouse once held a position of power? 3. The one with 30 years in congress and Chair of foriegn relations? 4.The one with 30 years in congress and formor Chair of the DNC 5.The one who served one term and co authured S.J.RES.46 6. The 4 year governor former UN ambassador, 20 years in government. 7. The one with ten years in congress and two as the mayor of Cleveland
john_stolworthy2007-07-26T17:20:31Z
Favorite Answer
The logical answer based on the information given would be #1, but if you add that #1 also had 10 years in their State Senate then the obvious choice is #2.
I'll start from most qualified just to throw off the curve: 3 (Biden) 4 (Dodd) 6 (Richardson) 7 (Kucinich) 5 (Edwards) at least he served a full term 1 (Obama) 2 (Clinton)
Oddly enough, you left off: 8. two term senator primarily known for his efforts in ending the draft following the Vietnam War and for having put into the public record the Pentagon Papers in 1971.
I don't think you necessarily rate someone higher because one has 30 years in Congress and another has 2 years in Congress, unless everything else about the candidates was the same, and then experience might count a little more. But even then you would have to compare the years of experience in Congress with the other person's years of experience doing whatever they were doing. And even then you might not necessarily prefer one candidate just because he or she is older and therefore has more years of experience than the other candidate. You might actually prefer the candidate with the fresher outlook and ideas.
And my proof of the above is that Abraham Lincoln, our greatest president, had only two years of federal government experience as a lowly congressman from Illinois before becoming president.
Well assuming you missed #2's term as senator it would possibly be number one assuming no other government experience, which in Obama's case should include his time in Chicago as well. But that being said, we've had some fairly experienced people in that top spot who weren't worth a bottle of gerbil shite. So, I'm looking for ideas as much as experience.
I argue that while experience is important, it cannot be the only determining factor. And you left out some qualifications on this list for several people, was this an oversight or are you trying to guide us to a point?