Experience

In the U.S. presidential race, Hillary Clinton is claiming more experience than Obama. I wonder how useful experience is when you are president, given that every situation is completely different from the last.

I can see how experience would be useful for just about any other sort of job. If you’re getting a heart bypass, you definitely want the doctor who has done it before. But does experience really help a president?

First, there is no job that is roughly similar to being president. So no one except a president or ex-president has experience that directly fits. In that regard, Hillary does have relevant experience, in the sense that she can consult her husband more often than Obama could if he were elected.

But how often does a political issue come up for which experience helps? If it is the same issue that has come up for years – say the conflict between the Israel and the Palestinians – then the only experience anyone has is in failing to fix it. Experience in failure can be useful, but it’s not a good indicator of future success.

If an issue is something new, such as the recent mortgage problems, the president has no more experience with it than anyone else. Every war and every economic problem is completely new. If you fight a new war the way you fought the last one, you lose.

The one sort of experience I can see being useful for a presidential candidate involves public appearances, including speeches and answering questions in debates. Anyone who comes through the nomination and election process will have plenty of that experience.  The ability to influence groups is a highly relevant skill for which experience is certainly useful.

If on-the-job experience helped a president, we would expect past presidents to have far more successful second terms than first. I don’t know how you factor in the lame duck effect, but is there historic evidence that presidents get more effective the longer they are on the job?

If you look at the great achievements in history, they are usually accomplished by younger people. Those people continue to acquire relevant experience throughout their careers but their successes do not continue at the same rate. For anything important, experience probably has a strong negative correlation with success. If that weren’t true, all the hit songs, hot startups, and new inventions would be coming from geezers.

Obama is often minimized by his opponents as being little but a smart guy who is a great talker. Realistically, is there any other type of experience that is more important for the job of president than learning how to be a great talker?

Comments

[Brant]

No experience but a great talker? Er, like Ronald Reagan? What exactly qualified HIM to be Governor of California, much less President*? He wasn't a President but he played one on TV. Good enough for his handlers. Politics is an inferior form of acting, just below TV soaps and just above amateur commercials done by the owner of the business.

Apparently, Fred Thompson is no Ronald Reagan. But he could probably sell you a used car.

[George]

http://s177.photobucket.com/albums/w235/indianluvsguitar/?action=view&current=25healy_600.jpg

[RealityCheck]

You appear to be operating under the false assumption that the president decides anything more complicated than how big his/her desk needs to be to fit an intern under it.

The president is a puppet, that much is glaringly obvious.

It's a blessing in disguise really though, just think what things would be like if that chimpanzee Bush was actually making decisions of importance.

[hogan]

Out of curiosity, why is it that people focus on what "dirt" the republicans will come up with on a dem candidate?

Yet they overlook things like Bush being a military deserter - by definition - and still getting to be commander in chief.

As far as Barack - I can't figure out how he got through childhood without his friends and/or family coming up with a nickname that would be easier to say, yell, or call to him without sounding like a crow that fell off its perch.

[Phil]

Experience doesn't seem to guarantee success for a President...look at the current incumbent. Besides, what experience do you want a President to have before s/he takes office? I thought the whole purpose of the constitution was that anyone has the right to be President.

[Frank]

One more thing:
On the other hand, no one will go along with those policies so I ask, does it really matter since we're screwed anyways?

[Frank]

Well, talk is cheap and politicians are not only liars but a dime a dozen it seems.

I'll apologize ahead of time if I repeat what anyone else said, but I don't quite care enough to read their drabble. Experience per se isn't what counts. I'd refine it to a track record. And, consequently, most of the candidates are the same stereotypical fecal smears/ politicians when it comes down to it. I'm not voting because I value my time, live in a county where my vote wouldn't mean squat, etc., but if I were to, the only one who seems to have a track record to support a position geared towards capitalist achievements would be the only consistent capitalist in the race-Ron Paul.

[Pender]

For those of you pointing out that management and presidency are almost the same thing, I find that managers who have been around a long time are the same ones who stonewall progress because "That's not the way we do things." One of our managers still can't seem to understand why we can't get quality workers when he is still offering the same entry level pay we offered 15 years ago.

[Allen Anderson]

As for Hillary trying yo use the fact that her husband was president, I honestly don't think that'll help her very much. After all, he's going down in history as the only president impeached for cheating on his wife and then lying about it. Watergate was one thing. But Clinton's impeachment is so pathetic, it was funny. And Bill Clinton's reign was at an entirely different time. We didn't have the problems back then than we do right now.

Obama would make a great president, because he's a great speaker and likewise an amazing leader. This country is going through some rough times, and I'm sure Obama can pull us together, no matter what we go through.

[BobNL]

It would just be cool to have a woman being president of the USA. The only relevant question is: do you think she'll be able to do the job? I think she will.

[caviar]

Looks like even I can get elected president of the USA :)

I have no political experience
I have limited exposure to American culture
I am young
I talk well (mostly)
I have the right hairstyle :)

[George]

Hmm...My previous comment didn't make it up here. Not sure why. Don't agree? Lost due to technology?

Lets try again...
While you make some good points, knowledge, understanding, and historical perspective (similar to experience) do count:
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2007-12-30-1.html

Unfortunately, I'm still not sure which candidate is best off on those points.

[Joe Blow]

Hillary. You get two presidents for the price of one. It's a much better ROI.

My 2 cents
JB

Also ... why is
- she "Hillary", first name.
....."Clinton" too close to Bill?
- he "Obama", last name.
....."Barack" too foreign sounding?
- he "McCain", last name.
....."John" too common or too much like a "John" (a male that buys sexual favors)?

[bush Anwar]

I remember you speaking of paper/scroll like screen for phones. Well here is the beginning of it http://www.polymervision.com/frameset.php?id=&page=

[Busy Dad Mumbles]

This campaign is easy. All the candidates are saying is,"change, vote for me, since I'm not the guy in the White House now!"

Let's not let anyone have a free pass into the job that is important.

Ask lots of questions and question the answers.

[Michael]

The thing that appeals to me about Obama is not necessarily his experience... its his power to motivate people. Look at his campaign: he started out as an unknown senator from Illinois, and decided to run for nomination against probably the most well known woman in politics. And he's been very successful, raising more money than her (despite Clinton's large head start) and rapidly moving up in the polls. Not only that, the more he campaigns, the more people like him! If that doesnt speak to his ability to motivate people, then I dont know what does. Obama is not running a campaign, he's running a revolution.

Being a good leader is a quality I really want in my president, because 90% of the time, the government does shit. Congress hasn't solved terrorism, energy, health care, social security, or balancing civil liberties and security. And you know why? Because they're all in the hands of big companies, and because most people are apathetic. If there's anyone who can change that, and convince our society its time to do something about these issues, its Obama.

[Hucka-beast]

Although I agree with you on your stance that some experience is completely useless when it comes to being President, there are some things that could potentially be useful. A great characteristic that could be gained by experience is knowing how to deal with crises. Take Huckabee, for instance. After Hurricane Katrina hit, while everyone one else was running in circles not sure what to do, he took in 75,000 refugees. This experience as governor of Arkansas has proved that he can handle crises quite well. Again, in reference to education, he completely changed the face of Arkansas. At the beginning of his time a governor, the Arkansas education system was one of the worst in the country. Huckabee created what is recognized as one of the best school accountability programs in America, and now the state is one of the best in education. In another instance, Huckabee created the ARKids First program, which supplies 70,000 Arkansas children with health care. The people of Arkansas love him because he has done so much for their state. Time voted Huckabee one of the top 5 governors in America in 2005. In fact, when he was reelected in 1998, he got the most votes of any Republican nominee ever in Arkansas.

The point I'm trying to make here, is that Huckabee has shown that he is not only a good leader, but that he is an outstanding leader that makes decisions that are in the best interests of the people he represents. If not for his experience in the office of governor, that would not be evident. Isn't the most important trait a president can have the ability to make good decisions and lead well? Shouldn't we all, therefore, vote for Mike Huckabee?

People say that he's a radical religious nut, but he's not. Although he does rely on faith (a faith that encourages moral decisions. No corruption here), he has said that he has more "respect for an honest atheist than a disingenuous believer." So then, what reason is there to not vote for him?

[KiwiAtaahua]

"A smart guy who is a great talker"?

So the opposite of the guy you've got now?

[Noah Vaile]

Why are none of my comments showing up?

[Verd]

I say that the kind of experience needed to be president is what is gained by being President. However, the gradual gathering of Presidential Experience is seldom useful while serving as President. I don't have a dog in this fight, but it is mightly peculiar that Obama is the only candidate with questionable experience. Or at least in the press and what is opined by his opponents. When Edwards ran, (almost along the same course as Obama, but with no prior campaign/election experience except the US Senate race), no one questioned his experience. I wonder what that is all about. This situation is almost like the black Quarterback debate of the 70's. Obama certainly has some experience in campaigning. What a brilliant campaign it has been. I guarantee you that every wannabe-re-elected politician is taking notes. I predict Obama will exceed Reagan in taking every state in November. It's about the campaign, Stupid. That's all the experience you need. Dilbert has got it right!

[Lucy]

I can’t believe there are so many ignorant people in this country who think that they need to vote for Obama because he has no history in politics, he has a clean record among other things. I just hope that Hillary wins so you stupid people learn your lesson. If Obama gets to be President I hope he gets out of control and this country turns into a real mess…not to far from what it is now! Hillary is the safest solution, use your brain Americans!!!

[Marco]

If elected, McCain will turn 76 in his last year of office.

I have yet to meet a person age 70+ who's at the top of their game mentally.

[Joseph Bernard]

There are many interesting comments here. Politics is definitely a topic that stirs us up. If we get so fired up:
1. How come we don't get more involved?
2. How come we don't ask more questions?
3. How come we choose to blame and complain instead of taking responsibilty for the government we have now?
4. How come we have lots of opinions but lack an open mind to explore other ideas?
5. How come we feel so righteous about our own ideas and so critical of others?
6. How come we feel so powerless to make a difference?
7. How come we don't demand more from our elected officials?
8. How come we don't demand Congress to hold this administration accountable?
9. How come we let this war in Iraq even start when it was based on lies that anyone could have found out with hardly any research on the Web?

There are so many questions you and I need to ask ourselves and so much more responsibility we need to take for the mess we are in. Are you ready to be more than just opinions?

Joseph

Joseph Bernard, Ph.D.
www.ExploreLifeBlog.com
www.Peace-Together.com

[Mark]

Obama talks a great deal - and he's obviously very intelligent, given the jobs he's had. But he doesn't really talk much about his plans. Change is needed, yes, but how is he going to deliver. His speeches, while good, sound a little hollow.

Clinton doesn't have that much experience in politics over Obama - she was elected only in 2000, remember. Obama has been in politics for roughly the same amount of time. She can claim that she's lived in the White-House, but that's not political experience. However, she was on the board of Wall-Mart, and she is experienced in business. But she sounds a little to phony for me. Unlike Obama, she sounds very rehearsed.

McCain - I don't really mind him all that much. Never been a fan of the Republican party, but he's moderate. He's not a religious nutjob, and he focuses on things other than terrorism.

Honestly, I don't think any politician is really going to be a radical. I don't think any candidate is going to bring down the USA or elevate it to new heights. Realistically - change is slow. It's measured in decades. A good president can deliver change, but just don't expect the world to get better overnight because a politician got elected. And don't expect the world to fall apart either.

The only candidate I really despise is Huckabee - he's a religious wack-job and that pretty much sums him up. Glad to see he has almost no chance of winning. It's not technically impossible for him, but it's very, very low.

[carol]

Hillary has experience - do we really want the same old thing that has been going on for years? Obama - he says he is for change but not all change is good. Just what are his plans? McCain - don't trust him.

So as I see it, there are no good choices this year.

And for those who laud the experience of a CEO of a large corporation. If you want all of the US to be outsourced to India, then go ahead and elect a CEO. For me, I don't think so. I've watched too many lips say one thing and actions say another.