Wasn't the "no experience" argument used against Bill Clinton?

[PresidentObama]

I respect Senator Clinton and many of her supporters who use the same line, but isn't it the same bullshit the Right Wing used against Bill Clinton when he was running for President in 1992?

I know, I know. Bill Clinton had experience.

He was governor of Arkansas and in office for 12 years.

Barack Obama has been in public life and in office for 11 years.

One years difference.

So if Bill Clinton had no experience in 1992, and he proved them wrong...does that mean all of you are wrong to use the same line against Barack Obama?

Especially when Bill only had one years difference in experience?

Clinton in 1992 talked about hope and change. And I must say, I liked the Clinton years, he delivered.

Barack Obama is talking about hope and change, like Bill did then.

And he's getting the no experience line like Bill did.

Won't stop him from getting nominated, nor elected.

Si Se Puede.

Yes We Can!

[loveangelc]

1. yes (how do you embed videos here?):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMlrSG1xb5k

[aquart]

2. You can't use that on a governor.

You can try, but, you'll notice, it did not work.

Barry wasn't a governor. He was a community organizer.

[PresidentObama]

3. He was a state Senator and then a U.S. Senator.

What does Senator Clinton have?

Seven years as Senator. That's her experience as an elected official.

As opposed to eleven years of being an elected official.

Just because he's doesn't have Washington experience, that isn't a bad thing.

[Ecumenist]

4. Why, yes it was....

Ain't that something? Funny how things turn around. I've been wondering why things have seemed to come full circle and although I have good memories of the Clinton administration, it seems a bit hypocritical. After all, Bill turned out to be one of the best presidents we've ever had. Perhaps, lack of inside ties is what works for a potential president elect.

[PresidentObama]

5. I think you have it right.

And Barack Obama is not an insider.

He'll be a great President!

[ZinZen]

6. Yes, I was actively paying attention to the 92 campaign

and the media and the Repubs were constantly stating that his experience was running a "tiny" state that was number 49 in best run states. They were also talking about him being too young, and of course, Gennifer Flowers was out and about.

[question everything]

7. Quality, not quantity (and why should something like that needs to be expalined on DU)?

The last time a senator was elected president was JFK in 1960. It is generally accepted that a governor experience is more relevant to the presidency than a senator one.

One is a legislative body, the other - an executive one.

[Alexander]

8. Why, yes. Clinton was also fond of talking about "Hope".

And we all know that you just can't trust "hope", now can you? :eyes:

[DiamondJay]

9. there is a huge difference

Bill Clinton was GOVERNOR, a leader of a state for 12 years, 1979-1981, 1983-1992. Barack Obama has 8 years as a state senator, and to get elected state senator is much much easier than governor of ANY state, even if a small state like Arkansas. State senators have a lot less responsibility. Bill Clinton as governor could not just sign 'present" on a bill. He either signed it or vetoed it. Barack then has 3 years as US Senator, but 2 of them have pretty much been spent campaigning for President. So for all intents and purposes, Bill Clinton had much more leadership experience than Obama. But of course if Obama is the nominee, I will use the OPs talking points as fodder to any and everyone I see.

[Pirate Smile]

10. They also used it on JFK. Nice avatar.

:)

Welcome aboard.:hi:

[PresidentObama]

12. Thanks. I like it too.

GOBAMA!

[ErnestoG]

11. Yes it was. How soon, and conveniently, they forget.