Who is the LEAST qualified Democratic candidate for president?

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.

He (Gravel) would fall between #6 and #7

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.

Numbers 1 through 7.

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?

1 & 2

I believe that whoever anyone considers to be the worst on their worst day would be head and shoulders above what our current excuse for a pResident is and will be.

They are ALL qualified to be President and they all fulfill the Constitutional Requirements and I suspect that any of them will Preserve, Protect and Defend The Constitution of The United States unlike the Esteemed Mr. Bush and his cronies.

~

Hillary is the least qualified. She wouldn't have even been a senator without riding Bill's coattails. We wouldn't have even remembered her name if she hadn't of ghost written a "poor me" book to cash in on his affair. If his infidelity had never become public she would have faded into the shadows with other first ladies of the past.

Running off her husband's notoriety is hardly a qualification.

Anyone without political clout will be as lost as Carter was and unable to accomplish any trade offs .

8. How about the one that isn't a career politician, who ran a successful company and turned it into a multi-million dollar profit for the shareholders, the one who has NEVER been accused of anything illegal or unethical, and the one who is isn't in it for the money or the power but because they simply want to do what they think is best for the American people?

(Oh wait, nobody like that available!)