Presidential Candidates: Experience Required?


Certified Shitlord
Should the presidential candidates in this country have experiential requirements?

I do not ask this out of spite for Obama, I don't buy into the "experience or lack thereof leads to an accurate prediction of quality" ideology that many of the right wing extremists subscribe to. What I'm asking, is since our president is responsible for so much in this country, why aren't we placing more pressure to elect well rounded people? I mean, the president is the head of the military yet our most recent presidents have had no sort of experience in an actual military engagement. No fighting during war, no firing of guns yet these guys are allowed to choose where to point them?

This works in all sorts of facets of American life. With the president being such a figurehead and leader, why aren't we pressing for more well-rounded people?

What about you?

Do you believe it is necessary for a president to have military experience in order to be nominated? Do you believe any sort of experience is necessary and thus, it's okay to elect based on personality and reputation alone?


Registered Member
Considering how many things the president is in charge of, I think it's a little much to expect him (or someday her) to be experienced in even most of them. And that's why presidents have advisors.

Besides, I've been in the military for 4 years, but I've never fought in a war and never fired a gun at someone. Admittedly, I'm probably the exception, but it still happens. And someone who was in before we went to Iraq is much more likely to be in the position I'm in - never seeing combat.