Say hello to our next president...

[The Senator]

I'm not counting First Lady as experience... Sorry. Not applicable. I'm counting how long she has been a senator and how long Obama has been a senator. Thus the argument about "experience" vs "change" is silly. Counting first lady experience is laughable.

Fine. You're still wrong, then, because Clinton has seven years experience vs. three years.

Also, look at her voting record, and compare it to his. It's like comparing a Whopper to a chicken nugget.

 

[BlackLantern]

being a First Lady is damn good experience as to how things run in the White House and the executive branch....whether you consider it relevant or not

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Fine. You're still wrong, then, because Clinton has seven years experience vs. three years.

Also, look at her voting record, and compare it to his. It's like comparing a Whopper to a chicken nugget.

My point isn't about Obama being more experienced. My point is about Hillary overstating HER experience. The whole "experience" vs "change" argument is silly. First Lady may be respectable but to count that in as your "experience" is ridiculous. She did not win any election for that, she simply married the President. It's funny how now that Bill's over zealous campaigning back fired, she makes it clear that the President's responsibility is separate from the spouse and she understands that from her time as First Lady

 

[Kelly]

My point isn't about Obama being more experienced. My point is about Hillary overstating HER experience. The whole "experience" vs "change" argument is silly. First Lady may be respectable but to count that in as your "experience" is ridiculous. She did not win any election for that, she simply married the President. It's funny how now that Bill's over zealous campaigning back fired, she makes it clear that the President's responsibility is separate from the spouse and she understands that from her time as First Lady

I think Eleanor Roosevelt, after FDR's death, and history would disagree with you on that....

 

[BlackLantern]

Im with Kel on this....I might not support Hilllary....but as First Lady, being in the white house for 8 years, embroiled in washington society, networking, making contacts....that counts for a lot in dc....for you to dismiss that is plain ******ed

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Even go that far back for an example. Sure, she would be of importance in handling the death of her husband a great President. Would that be notable experience in being able to handle the Presidency? I still can't see how they would connect to making important decisions. I believe it was Truman who brought stability as successor correct?

 

[BlackLantern]

it gives her an insight on the process though.....insight that the other candidates dont have

 

[The Senator]

Even go that far back for an example. Sure, she would be of importance in handling the death of her husband a great President. Would that be notable experience in being able to handle the Presidency? I still can't see how they would connect to making important decisions. I believe it was Truman who brought stability as successor correct?

Okay, then look at Edith Wilson, who history has regarded as essentially the first female President. After Woodrow had a stroke, she started taking over the executive branch. She commuted the sentence of a convicted murderer, and was responsible for making several policy decisions on his behalf.

History regards the First Lady as being critical in establishing diplomatic ties. As history progressed, First Ladies started playing a more active role in their husbands' administrations, with Hillary obviously taking center stage. And whether you believe her time as First Lady adds to her experience or not, you can't overlook how much of a role she and other First Ladies played parallel to the Presidency.

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Im with Kel on this....I might not support Hilllary....but as First Lady, being in the white house for 8 years, embroiled in washington society, networking, making contacts....that counts for a lot in dc....for you to dismiss that is plain ******ed

Yes, I dismiss that as experience for being a President. Let's see where does the First Lady fall in line of duty for running the country if the President is unable? We all know the VP takes over? Well what if the VP can't? Oh let's see where she falls in line to run the country.


Speaker of the House
President Pro Tempore of the Senate
Secretary of State
Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Agriculture
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of Education
Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Secretary of Homeland Security


Hmmm...........??? Don't see her listed.

 

[The Senator]

Yes, I dismiss that as experience for being a President. Let's see where does the First Lady fall in line of duty for running the country if the President is unable? We all know the VP takes over? Well what if the VP can't? Oh let's see where she falls in line to run the country.


Speaker of the House
President Pro Tempore of the Senate
Secretary of State
Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Agriculture
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of Education
Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Secretary of Homeland Security


Hmmm...........??? Don't see her listed.

Where does the Junior Senator from Illinois rank?

Oh, wait... he's not on there, either.

Moot point, duly noted.

 

[BlackLantern]

Im not saying she can be President or if she is capable....but her time as first lady gives her an edge .....not a large one....but still she has seen how the job is done from the inside.....no other candidate can say that

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Where does the Junior Senator from Illinois rank?

Oh, wait... he's not on there, either.

Moot point, duly noted.

Yes that actually is a moot point. If you read my earlier post I made the point clear already that it is not a question of Obama having more experience. The point was Hillary overstating her experience. Making this out to be a case of her experience vs his is silly. As in her experience is not so much more to overshadow his.

I thought I made that quite clear.

 

[Kelly]

Even go that far back for an example. Sure, she would be of importance in handling the death of her husband a great President. Would that be notable experience in being able to handle the Presidency? I still can't see how they would connect to making important decisions. I believe it was Truman who brought stability as successor correct?

LMAO, you think that's all she did????? Historians credit her with continuing FDR's "New Deal" policies....Truman knew how important she was, and continued to use her experience throughout his presidency. Are you kidding?????????

 

[The Senator]

Yes that actually is a moot point. If you read my earlier post I made the point clear already that it is not a question of Obama having more experience. The point was Hillary overstating her experience. Making this out to be a case of her experience vs his is silly. As in her experience is not so much more to overshadow his.

I thought I made that quite clear.

I responded to your decision to list the Line of Succession to the Preisdency. Listing the line of succession to the Presidency is a moot point in Presidential politics, unless the cabinet was infected with the Ebola virus recently and isn't expected to make it past Wednesday. But in the context of your argument, it made no sense whatsoever.

There are hundreds of officials in the White House who aren't considered in line for the Presidency, in addition to the 535 members of Congress and the fifty governors. You tried making a point-- that since the First Lady isn't in line for the Presidency, she must not have a huge role, and it must not give her some sort of experience. Unfortunately, you didn't make the cut.

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Did I say that's all she did? No. I just said even if all you have is her as an example for First Lady with experience (you had to go back to like the 1800's LOL @ U) That is still not enough to suggest that First Lady experience equates to reason for that person to be President. Again I believe Hillary overstates her experience against Obama. That was the point if you remember teacher.

 

[BlackLantern]

its not like either of them are getting elected.....we are basically debating 2nd and 3rd place here

 

[Kelly]

Did I say that's all she did? No. I just said even if all you have is her as an example for First Lady with experience (you had to go back to like the 1800's LOL @ U) That is still not enough to suggest that First Lady experience equates to reason for that person to be President. Again I believe Hillary overstates her experience against Obama. That was the point if you remember teacher.

Um, Wilson and Roosevelt were both Presidents in the 20th century.....







Done with this debate, go read some more......

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I responded to your decision to list the Line of Succession to the Preisdency. Listing the line of succession to the Presidency is a moot point in Presidential politics, unless the cabinet was infected with the Ebola virus recently and isn't expected to make it past Wednesday. But in the context of your argument, it made no sense whatsoever.

There are hundreds of officials in the White House who aren't considered in line for the Presidency, in addition to the 535 members of Congress and the fifty governors. You tried making a point-- that since the First Lady isn't in line for the Presidency, she must not have a huge role, and it must not give her some sort of experience. Unfortunately, you didn't make the cut.

I posted the succession in response to this:

"but as First Lady, being in the white house for 8 years, embroiled in washington society, networking, making contacts...."

In other words saying as First Lady her responsibilities did not stretch. Furthermore, such an experience does not count in why I would vote for someone as President.

 

[The Senator]

Did I say that's all she did? No. I just said even if all you have is her as an example for First Lady with experience (you had to go back to like the 1800's LOL @ U)

Credibility alert: Woodrow Wilson was President from 1913-1921, and Edith Wilson was the unofficial acting President from 1919 to 1921, and FDR was President from 1933 until 1945.

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Um, Wilson and Roosevelt were both Presidents in the 20th century.....







Done with this debate, go read some more......

I obviously meant 1900's

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

FDR was born in 1882 yeah yeah lead us through world war II/ depression.

 

[The Senator]

Furthermore, such an experience does not count in why I would vote for someone as President.

You should have said that in the first place, instead of going on some tirade as to how First Ladies aren't experienced, don't play any important role in their husbands' administration, etc.

 

[The Senator]

I obviously meant 1900's

You said you had to go all the way back to the 1800s... so if you meant 1900s... you would damage your credibility further, since, you know, FDR's Presidency was only 70 years ago.

 

[Kelly]

I obviously meant 1900's

Yeah....


And the fact that we are sooooooooooooooooo far into the 21st Century....makes your argument that much stronger....... Were you born in the 21st Century?

 

[CrypticOne]

It's all but guaranteed at this point. The US will never elect a female or black candidate. That's the [perhaps] unfortunate truth about this country. Anyway, I really want to make this thread so that I can bump it and say "I told you so" by the end of the year.

HAHA! I don't think so. America will change for the good. And electing a black or female candidate will put us on the right track. It'll happen. I'm personally rooting for Obama to take it.