Is the presidential race best characterized as unqualified Democratic Idealogues vs. Republican Pragmatists?

You are correct! They treat Obama like a Rock star, but really he is just a junior senator who didn't show up to his job 37% of the time, which is the worst democratic record. Repeating the word "change" over and over again is fitting since the "change" will be putting someone into office who's 40 years old and doesn't know what the hell he's doing. Hillary's experience consist of being a wife to a crappy president. This is the best they have? We will crush them in November.

We don't pick presidents based on their resumes and its probably a good thing that we don't as a review of American presidents will show that there doesn't seem to be much connection between experience and success at anything else and success at being president.

Harry Truman, who never graduated from college, was a failed haberdasher who was put into office by the corrupt Pendergast machine, became a moderately successful Senator and was utterly ignored by FDR after Truman became VP. Most folks think him a pretty successful president.

Jimmy Carter was a well educated man, a graduate of the Naval Academy who also studied at Georgia Tech and took some post-graduate courses, a nuclear engineer, a naval officer, and the governor of Georgia. His presidency was a disaster.

Americans don't expect the President to govern alone but to pick good people to handle the myriad tasks of government. The President sketches the big picture and the staff handle the details. It is enough that they have confidence in his judgement and general character. They then look to the big picture his discussion of the issues creates.

The only Candidate with successful experience at creating a good national economy is Hillary Clinton.

During Bill Clinton's term as President he and Hillary Clinton created the best economy that we have had in the history of this nation.

The economy and the depression that we are heading into because of Republican mismanagement are the most serious issues that we face. Only Hillary Clinton has successful experience at creating a good national economy. Only Hillary Clinton has the experience to clean up the mess that the Republicans have made of this economy.

Barack Obama has extraordinary academic credentials. After two terms as Vice President with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama will have the experience to become a phenomenal President.

With respect to the Republican candidates, they are the very definition of unqualified ideologues.

The two pragmatists in this race are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

I think you're missing the point here. Of course no one thinks Obama is the most experienced candidate, but that doesn't mean people who vote for him are simply doing so because he's black (he's half, really) or because they're party loyalists. They're voting for him because of his beliefs and what he stands for, because of the kinds of policies he says he will have. They're voting for him because he has many of the Democratic ideals as part of his platform.

Loyalists and feminists are voting for Hillary. People voting for Obama want someone new and fresh. However, that doesn't mean people aren't voting for him by his positions alone.

Experience doesn't necessarily mean qualification; in my book, too much time in Washington is a negative, and I won't be voting for any career politician like McCain, nor a Republican governor, simply because I do not agree with Republican ideology.

I couldn't agree more. I have the very same reasons. If Democrats wanted someone with experience, the would had voted for Dodd, Biden, or Richardson. All three of these men have more experience, and I'm not referring to their tenure.

Signed: an Independent

I would say no, not at all. Here is what I believe attracts voters to the following candidates:

Obama - for his optimism, hope, and positive message

Clinton - for experience and competency

Edwards - for having the proper diagnosis of our problems

McCain - for his independence and strong character

Romney - for his executive experience

Giuliani - for being America's mayor

Huckabee - for his religious beliefs and populism

Thompson - for his adherance to tired old ideas

Don't fool yourself. Just because you think that some of the Republican candidates are more qualified based on their experience in the state executive, doesn't mean that this is why people are voting for them. That, my friend, is two logical fallacies if you weren't keeping track: faulty causation and begging the question.

None of the candidates have ever been president. therefore none of them are more experienced than the others.

How much experience did George Washington have?

All candidates are American Citizens and we will vote for them in hopes that they will beable to represent our thoughts and ideas of how we want this country to be.

yes,people will vote for an empty suite because they want change.people will vote for a woman ,even though she got there on sombody else's back.remember she had to move to ny to get voted in.well people no matter what there will be change no matter what,W is done,he has served his country,terms over.change can be for good/bad.

It's going to be the LONGEST 4 years in the History of Mankind. Get ready for it.