Democrats need to move on about the experience thing. It's a losing battle. I don't think Palin was such a great choice, except for this line of debate alone. They cannot attack her experience because it too easily shines a light on Obama's lack of resume. Yet, somehow, someway, Dems continue to harp on this. Dems are certaintly awful about framing an argument and making a stance/point clear.
I guess one of my main issues with McCain is this:
I have a hard time voting for a man that lost the Republican nomination in 2000 to Bush. The Republican machine vehemenently backed Bush over McCain and that I can't understand. The bottom line is, contrary to popular belief, the President is not most powerful man in the world -- he is still a creation of his party and depends on their support. Give credit to McCain for having a bipartisan past, but rest assured his cabinet and advisors will be Republicans -- the same Republicans that most likely backed Bush through his term. Unfortunately, McCain suffers greatly from the Bush hang over as Obama is not an impressive candidate.
We all have our issues we pick our candidates on and while I mock the ambiguity of the Obama campaign slogans of "change" and "hope" (I mean honestly, what the hell are these?); I find myself deciding on the sole factor of wanting as much separation from Bush as possible (said another way, I guess I really do want change -- i'm cringing just writing it). Is that the right reason to vote for or against someone -- decidedly not. But rest assured, Bush's legacy weighs negatively on bipartisan voters.
