Sitting on the back bench in Springfield, IL, while voting “Present” is hardly relevant experience.
True. If that’s all Obama did, then it would be relevant. But here’s a hint – Hannity and the birthers might not be correct in all the things they say about Obama.
What does Hannity have to do with anything?
Well, he’s polling decently in Iowa. I suspect he would have done well among evangelicals,except now with Huck in the race I don’t think Carson has a niche anymore.
No, let them run, by all means. I just disagree with your statement that Carson’s experience entitles him to be heard.
Don’t try to tell people what I believe.
How does Mr. Community Organizer’s experience entitle him to be heard?
Your description of the President’s experience in the IL State Senate is inaccurate and sounds like the bullshit Hannity spews daily. He actually did stuff.
Once again, up at the top of the page, do you see where it says “Republican candidates”?
What did he do? Provide cites.
Yeah, he voted with his party reliably and kept his head down like a good footsoldier. Then he ran for President and managed to co-opt the rationale for BOTH Clinton and McCain. It’s a talent, I’ll give him that.
So only Democrat candidates with no experience are required to be heard?
No, it means this is a thread for talking about Republican candidates.
Obama has a sound political mind. And he’s an expert on constitutional law. And he had experience in politics.
Carson sells snake oil and thinks evolution is made up. He can however slice up a brain with panache.
One wonders if he practiced on himself, like how a novice tattoo artist will do his own legs.
Given how often he’s lost Supreme Court cases by a huge margin, I don’t think his constitutional expertise is all that great. BrainGlutton brought up McCain’s flying skill, I suspect that Obama’s constitutional law students got ripped off.
Thankfully, your suspicions don’t exactly have an impressive track record. 
Yeah, I heard Obama lost one of his Supreme Court cases by, like, a million votes.
Can we just have a thread somewhere for sore-losers bitching about Obama, so every motherfucking thread in this forum doesn’t have to be hijacked with this shit?
Okay, we get it, there’s a double standard.
Latest national poll, Romney leads Bush by a good margin, which doesn’t say much for Bush’s chances. He can’t claim lack of name recognition.
Ben Carson is in third.
Do polls really matter yet? In early 2011, Mike Huckabee led in several polls.
It surprises me that Huckabee is still seen as a viable candidate. I don’t think a former democratic governor could survive having commuting the sentence of a criminal who went on to murder four cops, not to mention his involvement in the parole of convicted rapist Wayne Dumond, who promptly raped and murdered a woman. Now there is a man with remarkable judgement.
I fervently hope the republicans nominate Ben Carson, but it will never happen. It was fair criticism when Obama to first ran to point out that he only had 12 years experience as an elected politician. Just as it was fair game to point out that George W. Bush only had 6 years under his belt. Unless Carson is completely blinded by ego, perhaps he’s positioning himself for Surgeon General under Romney or Bush.
ETA: For all the talk about Carson in these threads, I’ve yet to hear anyone make a case for his presidency. It’s easy to make one for Christie or Cruz, but what does this guy even bring to the table?
Polls don’t tell us who is going to win this early, but they do still give us valuable information. THe fact that Romney has a large lead on Bush despite them having equal name recognition says that Romney is probably the more viable candidate of the two.
Huckabee is a favorite of the evangelicals and pretty much no one else. Plus he’s a good talker, friendly, and non-threatening. Those traits can make up for a lot of bad policy calls. If there’s one thing I’ve noticed, it’s that politicians that are punished for their behavior are just as often being punished for being non-charismatic as anything else. Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama could get away with a shitload of stuff that would have killed the careers of less interesting personalities.
Carson is a man on a mission and I wouldn’t be surprised if like GWB he thinks God is calling him to this. But no, he has little chance, although he may enjoy a short ride at the top like Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann, and Newt Gingrich last cycle. Then he’ll lose and hopefully run for Senate in Michigan like the GOP establishment wants him to.
Well, as far as Ted Cruz goes I think there’s more of a case for Carson than Cruz. What’s Ted Cruz ever done outside of academia and being one of the most unproductive Senators?
I think a mistake a lot of people make is to assume that once a politician has experience, he’s more qualified than someone without that experience. On the contrary, if someone’s experience shows they are very bad at their job, or mediocre, why would you consider them for a more important job? Carson is a success story. Cruz peaked as an academic and has so far failed as a Senator. What makes Cruz more qualified for the job? Nothing. If Carson is unqualiifed, Cruz is equally as unqualified. With the difference being that Cruz has proven he’s unqualified, as opposed to Carson, who is just unqualified on paper.