3 ms·

I'm not sure that the exact same discussion would be had if she were a Democrat, but not because people would be giving her a free pass. The Republican party m

I'm not sure that the exact same discussion would be had if she were a Democrat, but not because people would be giving her a free pass. The Republican party makes it a major plank to support large business and to support issues that benefit the wealthy/large, while making less-than-indisputable arguments as to why the decisions benefit the rest of the company. Thus, her tenure at a large business is quite relavent to her viability as a Republican candidate, while it's less relavent (though certainly still important) to her viability as a democrat.

ahoyhere 16y ago
I agree. I'm far from considering myself a democrat (I hate both parties pretty much equally), but aren't most of the "experience is totally out of left field" politicians Republican? The Gipper Arnold Schwarzenegger Clint Eastwood Carly Fiorina George W Bush (his main claim before governorship, other than genetic, was running a baseball team) Who else? Sarah Palin - sportscaster Sonny Bono Shirley Temple (yes really - she ran for office, didn't win, but was chosen as a diplomat) On the Democrat side there is… who? Hillary Clinton? But she actually majored in polisci and law, which is a traditional path. Al Franken is odd but he was a political humorist. And he graduated from Harvard with a degree in polisci. In fact, though I looked, the only Democrat I could find who fit the bill was Jerry Springer. Yes, that's Gipper-level weird.
- protomyth 16y ago
  Ronald Reagan had a long lead-up to running for Governor of CA and eventually President. Sarah Palin did the mayor => governor path that happens a lot. GWB did a lot of behind the scenes work in Bush I's White House which followed a pretty normal political path. Clint Eastwood ran for mayor in a pretty normal fashion. Some of it is Democrat's looking for inexperience or Republican's trying to be seen as "outside the system", but it is a pretty normal path taken by pretty much everyone listed. It matches the Democrats on about an even basis. Look at the actual paths of people and not what the media tells you. For example, The last election had both top spots as Senators with no executive office experience in a lower rung of government. This is generally not good when you know that neither had done a budget cycle from the executive prospective (e.g. mayor, governor). This lack of experience, probably lead to some of the problems seen with the federal budget cycles. // I do believe the same probably would have been true of a McCain admin even with a VP that had been through it as a mayor and governor.

ahoyhere 16y ago

I agree. I'm far from considering myself a democrat (I hate both parties pretty much equally), but aren't most of the "experience is totally out of left field" politicians Republican? The Gipper Arnold Schwarzenegger Clint Eastwood Carly Fiorina George W Bush (his main claim before governorship, other than genetic, was running a baseball team) Who else? Sarah Palin - sportscaster Sonny Bono Shirley Temple (yes really - she ran for office, didn't win, but was chosen as a diplomat) On the Democrat side there is… who? Hillary Clinton? But she actually majored in polisci and law, which is a traditional path. Al Franken is odd but he was a political humorist. And he graduated from Harvard with a degree in polisci. In fact, though I looked, the only Democrat I could find who fit the bill was Jerry Springer. Yes, that's Gipper-level weird.

protomyth 16y ago
Ronald Reagan had a long lead-up to running for Governor of CA and eventually President. Sarah Palin did the mayor => governor path that happens a lot. GWB did a lot of behind the scenes work in Bush I's White House which followed a pretty normal political path. Clint Eastwood ran for mayor in a pretty normal fashion. Some of it is Democrat's looking for inexperience or Republican's trying to be seen as "outside the system", but it is a pretty normal path taken by pretty much everyone listed. It matches the Democrats on about an even basis. Look at the actual paths of people and not what the media tells you. For example, The last election had both top spots as Senators with no executive office experience in a lower rung of government. This is generally not good when you know that neither had done a budget cycle from the executive prospective (e.g. mayor, governor). This lack of experience, probably lead to some of the problems seen with the federal budget cycles. // I do believe the same probably would have been true of a McCain admin even with a VP that had been through it as a mayor and governor.