Experience vs. Competence
My friends have been having a spirited debate about whether or not Palin’s experience is a worthwhile topic for discussion. I think Lasloo is of the opinion that Obama and Palin’s experience is roughly comparable, and he does have a point there. I mean, if you compare resume bullet points, Obama’s is a quite a bit better. But there’s no getting around the fact that his political history is pretty short. But I think the “experience” thing is just a stand-in for the real, more difficult measure: is the nominee competent?
I get the impression here that Lasloo also thinks this is a pointless argument — he’d rather we talk about the issues. And, of course, we do. But some people aren’t interested in the issues.
I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard someone — a self-described “independent” — say something like “I’m for whoever will do the best job.” These people want to feel that whoever the president is, he or she will make the right decision, whatever that decision may be. Such voters are looking for a good administrator who will take on thinking and deciding big issues. Issue statements are just so much blah-blah politician bullshit.
Experience is one important metric in deciding that. But practically everyone understands that what you put on paper doesn’t equal what you are actually able to do. When my company hires new people, the president doesn’t look just at years of experience, education, or technical certifications. He also looks at what applicants have done, how they talk about their work, how they think about problems, and how they interact with other people. He asks two basic questions: “does this person have the experience?” and “is this person capable?”
My read on Obama is that he’s an inexperienced statesman but he has a prodigious talent and has shown significant skill. His resume is short but high on quality. Palin’s resume is shorter, and there’s plenty of demonstration of poor judgment. And in her interviews, she’s demonstrated an inability to articulate even her own side’s argument. I would be nervous giving her just about any task to do, and that includes running the country. As far as McCain is concerned, he has a very long resume, but I think it demonstrates particularly poor judgment the last few years. His recent campaign certainly demonstrates shockingly poor judgment. Picking Palin is a good example of an atrocious decision.
Does this matter as much as issues do? I think it’s more valuable to look at where the candidates stand on issues that are important to you. But judgement is also important, and if you don’t care about the issues or would rather not think about them, well, “judgement” is all you have to go on. So questioning Palin’s competence is fair game.
