Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-01-2012, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 2,167,197 times
Reputation: 1071

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathagos View Post
Contrary to some other posters on here, I see large value in the subject of this thread. Not that it will matter much in the annals of American history, but in a more retrospective view and a look at American societal dynamics and psychology.

I got most of the information from the Internet, and, therefore, cannot account for the veracity of all the information. But, on the surface, it does (in fact) appear that Obama did not have the experience to the level of many of his predecessors (with the possible exception of Ronald Reagan).

Barack H. Obama - Education: Columbia, Harvard Law. Military Service: None. Political Experience: State Senator (6 years), U.S. Senator (1 year). Positions/Accomplishments: Director of Developing Communities, State Chairman of Health and Human Services. Jobs: Law professor.

George W. Bush - Education: Yale, Harvard. Military Service: Air National Guard. Political Experience: Governor of Texas (5 years). Positions/Accomplishments: First Texas Governor elected to two consecutive terms. Credited (while Governor) with Texas becoming national leader in wind power. Jobs: Business creator/owner (oil industry).

William J. Clinton - Education: Georgetown, Yale, Oxford. Military Service: None. Political Experience: State Attorney General, Governor of Arkansas (12 years). Positions/Accomplishments: Organized State Democratic Leadership Council, Chair of National Governors Association. Jobs: Law professor.

Similarly George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and James (Jimmy) E. Carter all had military service, previous state political stations, and held various positions (Reagan's outside of politics).

Does this make Obama unqualified for President? Of course not. But, it's still a valid question whether someone who was white with those same qualifications would have gotten the votes necessary to beat Hillary Clinton? Agreed that it's a "what if" scenario, but I don't know what people personally have against that.

The point is valid, in my opinion, and worthy of discussion. We're supposed to be a society that treats people equally. We know that's not the case by a long shot. We're also supposed to learn about racial equality through asking and addressing the tough questions. So, I guess I don't know where the heartburn is in the OP asking.

I do not think that a white politician with the same qualifications as Obama would have beat Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. I base that not on race alone, but on the qualifications of Hillary herself, and those of all who were presidents all the way back to the mid-70s.
I completely agree. I'm not saying that Barack isn't a smart man but to say that his experience prior to the presidency indicated that he would be a sucessful candidate is baffling. Which of course begs the question...how did he get elected? On top of that, if I may make one correction to his resume listed above, Obama was never a tenure-track professor. Obama was a constitutional law LECTURER which is quite different. I'm not saying that it isn't an impressive position...but it certainly isn't the caliber of a full Professor.

The heartburn, quite simply, comes from those with no answer or interest in tackling racial issues. The majority are supposed to be overtly apologetic, bordering on sycophantic, to their ideological whims and any contradictory thoughts are sure to be shot down and labeled as racially motivated. If you notice the exchange I've had with this adiostreador character...his/her only appeal is to racism. Their argument is tantamount to saying, "well if you disagree with Obama or his policies, you MUST be a racist because no other explanations exist." Any thoughtful person will obviously know that this is horsesh*t.

To the last paragraph...neither do I. Hillary had far more qualifications and she was more popular prior to Barack's surge. The air around the Obama campaign in 2008 was a remarkable mixture of lofty ideological ramblings of little meat and far fetched appeals to the romantic. We all know/knew he had no record worth speaking of to run on so it was in his interest, as it is this time around, to paint his candidate as someone to run from. Granted, the political atmosphere was different in 2008 from the Bush hangover and the recession so painting the opposing candidate as the problem was much easier but that doesn't begin to explain why Obama surged ahead while Hillary fell by the wayside. The real area of intrigue to me is the support Obama received from upper-middle class suburban whites. My best guess is that this demographic felt some inherited responsibility for the Black struggle and felt some misguided need to appease this by showing themselves and their friends that they weren't racially backward. Which to me is racist, or at least racially motivated, in and of itself which is problematic anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-01-2012, 03:05 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, California
4,373 posts, read 3,223,282 times
Reputation: 1041
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22 View Post
race, race, race, race, race, race, race.

Translation: I can't answer your question because I lack the ability to string together a coherent, relevant thought that doesn't end up with me whining like a petulant teenager about race.
Cool. Doesn't change the fact that your issue with this whole POTUS thing falls to one thing and one thing only:

Skin Color.

The sooner you accept this the sooner we can move on. You can't come up with any argument that doesn't trace back to the race issue. You're a borderline racist (if not a full one) yet you refuse to accept it.

That's cool - your hypocrisy will be the end of you. Oh well!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2012, 03:07 PM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 2,167,197 times
Reputation: 1071
Quote:
Originally Posted by adiosToreador View Post
Cool. Doesn't change the fact that your issue with this whole POTUS thing falls to one thing and one thing only:

Skin Color.

The sooner you accept this the sooner we can move on. You can't come up with any argument that doesn't trace back to the race issue. You're a borderline racist (if not a full one) yet you refuse to accept it.

That's cool - your hypocrisy will be the end of you. Oh well!

What specifically makes you think that I'm racist other than disliking Obama?

Please be thorough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2012, 03:19 PM
 
6,129 posts, read 6,792,659 times
Reputation: 10821
Well, you do realize that that's why the Abe Lincoln comparisons come up with Obama right? Lincoln had been a state senator and a one term congressman when he was elected. So it is not unprecedented, it happened before and when it did the man was white.

Other presidents were fairly light on executive political experience I believe, you could probably Google other names.

ETA: One of the things that confuses me a bit about this recurring argument is that the guy had a long run as a State Senator and while he was there, he certainly had a record and worked on a ton of bills. So it's not like Barak Obama fell out of the political sky and we had no idea of who he was in a governing sense. He left a paper trail. If he knew how to do nothing else, he knew how to pass legislation. **shrugs**
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2012, 03:48 PM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 2,167,197 times
Reputation: 1071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinawina View Post
Well, you do realize that that's why the Abe Lincoln comparisons come up with Obama right? Lincoln had been a state senator and a one term congressman when he was elected. So it is not unprecedented, it happened before and when it did the man was white.

Other presidents were fairly light on executive political experience I believe, you could probably Google other names.

ETA: One of the things that confuses me a bit about this recurring argument is that the guy had a long run as a State Senator and while he was there, he certainly had a record and worked on a ton of bills. So it's not like Barak Obama fell out of the political sky and we had no idea of who he was in a governing sense. He left a paper trail. If he knew how to do nothing else, he knew how to pass legislation. **shrugs**

I'm not, nor have ever said that Obama was entirely unqualified. Obama had a long tenure as a state senator but he essentially went from state senator to President which in modern times is unheard of. The political atmosphere is quite a bit different in 2008 and 1860. Obama basically spent his entire time as a US Senator campaigning for the presidency. Lincoln, on top of being a decorated miliatary captain and a chief officer in the Black Hawk War, was a leader in the charge to rid the nation of slavery and he was seen as militarily competent which Obama clearly was not.

On top of his military, economic, and foreign policy inexperience he was essentially unheard of on the national scale. He delivered the keynote speech in 04, but aside from that he wasn't a huge star. But when he broke in during 08 he EXPLODED. His rise in popularity was unprecedented.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2012, 04:05 PM
 
6,129 posts, read 6,792,659 times
Reputation: 10821
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22 View Post
I'm not, nor have ever said that Obama was entirely unqualified. Obama had a long tenure as a state senator but he essentially went from state senator to President which in modern times is unheard of. The political atmosphere is quite a bit different in 2008 and 1860. Obama basically spent his entire time as a US Senator campaigning for the presidency. Lincoln, on top of being a decorated miliatary captain and a chief officer in the Black Hawk War, was a leader in the charge to rid the nation of slavery and he was seen as militarily competent which Obama clearly was not.

On top of his military, economic, and foreign policy inexperience he was essentially unheard of on the national scale. He delivered the keynote speech in 04, but aside from that he wasn't a huge star. But when he broke in during 08 he EXPLODED. His rise in popularity was unprecedented.
I didn't say that you accused him of being entirely unqualified(?)... I thought you were asking if anyone else with comparatively light political experience ever got elected president, so I was just answering that. I wasn't aware you only wanted someone from modern times. No worries.

Anyway, I'm not sure what anyone can say to answer you. What are we supposed to say? There's no way to "prove" anything. To you it's "proof" of a racial factor, someone else could say it's "proof" of a charisma factor, another could say it's "proof" of the thirst for an end to the bickering, which is what he promised... and others could say it was a mix of three. No one can provide empirical evidence of anything. So I guess you should just believe what you want to believe? I just don't know what there is to talk about really.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2012, 04:18 PM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,294,925 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22 View Post
I'm not, nor have ever said that Obama was entirely unqualified. Obama had a long tenure as a state senator but he essentially went from state senator to President which in modern times is unheard of. The political atmosphere is quite a bit different in 2008 and 1860. Obama basically spent his entire time as a US Senator campaigning for the presidency. Lincoln, on top of being a decorated miliatary captain and a chief officer in the Black Hawk War, was a leader in the charge to rid the nation of slavery and he was seen as militarily competent which Obama clearly was not.

On top of his military, economic, and foreign policy inexperience he was essentially unheard of on the national scale. He delivered the keynote speech in 04, but aside from that he wasn't a huge star. But when he broke in during 08 he EXPLODED. His rise in popularity was unprecedented.
So mitt was a one governor who basically failed at it is more qualified? Even if you want to go back, was Palin even qualified to run as a V.P?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2012, 04:19 PM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,294,925 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed from California View Post
If the people who voted for obama weren't idiots he wouldn't be president. But they were/are and he is.
Funny I said the same thing about Bush II , but your idiots made the same mistake TWICE!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2012, 04:28 PM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 2,167,197 times
Reputation: 1071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinawina View Post
I didn't say that you accused him of being entirely unqualified(?)... I thought you were asking if anyone else with comparatively light political experience ever got elected president, so I was just answering that. I wasn't aware you only wanted someone from modern times. No worries.

Anyway, I'm not sure what anyone can say to answer you. What are we supposed to say? There's no way to "prove" anything. To you it's "proof" of a racial factor, someone else could say it's "proof" of a charisma factor, another could say it's "proof" of the thirst for an end to the bickering, which is what he promised... and others could say it was a mix of three. No one can provide empirical evidence of anything. So I guess you should just believe what you want to believe? I just don't know what there is to talk about really.
I apologize if the "entirely unqualified" thing came off as snappy...that wasn't my intent. And I understand the point you are driving at. Obama isn't on an island historically speaking, with his experience...but in modern times his experience is isolated a bit.

Ultimately there isn't "proof" that exists. We all just postulate theories that we think are right, invariably with no real way to validate or invalidate either side. Obama's meteoric rise into the national spotlight to me is surprising, if not questionable. And I'm not saying that I think it is fundamentally incorrect that race potentially is NOT a factor...but it also stands the potential to be a significant factor. When I was the vp of the College Republicans at my university we had several debates on campus during the election season. I had to debate the VP of the Young Democrats on my campus and we had the opportunity to make appeals at the end of the debate for our candidates. I spoke of John McCain's military service, his many many years in the senate, his moderate record of bipartisanship, and his experience as a whole. My opponent(an african american) spoke about how she wishes her grandmother, who lived through some very tough times, could see Obama. My appeal, at least to me, was about the merit of the candidate whereas hers was about the significance of his race. To me that is just fundamentally wrong if we truly want to move to a more colorblind society. Now..that being said I'm not trying to indicate that I disagree entirely with the excitement from african americans to see a black major candidate. Black americans have had their share of hardships so I could only imagine it is exciting to see one of your own in such an important position...I just think that a lot of them based their vote solely on this factor alone and that is just as bad (imo) as voting for someone just because they AREN'T a certain color.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2012, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 2,167,197 times
Reputation: 1071
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime View Post
So mitt was a one governor who basically failed at it is more qualified? Even if you want to go back, was Palin even qualified to run as a V.P?

Palin----God no...she isn't qualified for dog catcher.

Mitt----More so to me than Obama in 2008. Compare Mitt of 2012 and Obama of 2008 and it isn't even close. Mitt had goverened...Obama had legislated....substantial difference. Mitt had managed a sucessful business, Obama couldn't even make a tenure track position at a Law school. Mitt put the Olympic games in the black, Obama built himself as a "community organizer" <--WTF??? Mitt is a business guy, Obama is an attorney(ish).

On top of that most polls have more Americans trusting Romney with the economy even after Obama has had 4 years of on the job training.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:35 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top