I do agree that presidents shouldn't need to be technologists. It's nice if they are, but being able to run a software product is not the most important thing f

I do agree that presidents shouldn't need to be technologists. It's nice if they are, but being able to run a software product is not the most important thing for a potential president to run. However, that doesn't mean lessons can't be gleamed and abstracted. The President has to outsource a lot of knowledge and work. Presidents are typically experts at something, but not at most things. President Obama is a former Constitutional Law Professor. It's reasonable to assume that he understands Constitutional Law at a very high level; it's also reasonable to assume that Constitutional Law is one of the few things that he has a very high level of expertise at. All Presidents have to work with other experts and teams to get things done. The fact that Governor Romney's tech teams failed so badly can be looked at a mark of his management abilities. He doesn't need to be a tech expert, but he does need to know how to put the right people in place to be successful. I look at these failings as a case study as to what could of happened with other areas Governor Romney could have had to outsource: defense leadership, diplomacy, transportation policy and vision, etc. At some point, you can't pass the buck. Steve Jobs said reasons stop mattering when you hit the vp level at Apple. Assuredly reasons have to stop mattering when you reach the level of potential president of the United States of America.