Quote:
Originally posted by Sparhawk
Get a viable third party candidate, and I'll listen to what he has to say. I like consumer advocates and computer programmers, but do I think they have the experience to be president? No. I mean, we called Bush inexperienced when he was the Governor of the third biggest state in the country for 6 years, what does that say about Nader and Badnarik? I mean, at least a hypothetical Ventura candidacy has credibility, with 4 years governing a large midwestern state (as bad a job as he might have done at it, but still, credible IMO).
You need more than good ideas to be up on that stage, and the vast majority of Americans agree.
|
Although my comment really doens't have to do with the debates necesarily, but to say that inexperience in politics should negate, remove, or denounce any person/candidate from running is so anti-American. I am not ridiculing what you said Spar., (cause I don't think that was what you were saying) but wanted to say that our founding fathers were not experienced in politics. But they were very intelligent.
Today's politicians are just that, politicians are being elected for the money and the power. Our original Congress and "politicians" did not get paid. They did it for the love of our country. The only reason you and I cannot run is because we are not already wealthy or have powerful families. Look at the past 50 years of presidents. These men have know how to work the
system, which does not mean they know
how to run a country, rather, how to get elected. That is what it is all about now.