Experience vs. Judgment

One of the themes of this presidential has been and will be "experience" vs. "judgment." In the Democratic primary, Hillary claimed to have much more experience, whereas Barack Obama claims superior judgment. In the general election, it's much the same, except that John McCain is the one claiming lots of experience.

It can be hard to make a judgment about which is preferable; it mostly comes down to a personal choice. If you're over 60, experience may very well trump "judgment," because you have the benefit of lots of experience. Obama bases his claim of superior judgment in large part on his opposition to the war. But is there another example of him using superior judgment?

Actually, yes, and the evidence is this primary campaign. I don't think there has ever been a candidate for president with as much experience in presidential campaigns, other than sitting presidents, as Hillary Clinton. I've heard stories of her working on the McGovern campaign back in '72. I'm sure she has been involved in all of them since, and, of course, was in the middle of the elections in '92 and '96.

Obama, on the other hand, has run one Senate race, against an incredibly weak opponent (Alan Keyes).

This, then, is is a clear example of "experience" vs. "judgment," and, in this case, judgment wins, hands down. Besides a wealth of experience, Hillary had many all kinds of advantages.

Despite all that, she did not run a great campaign. Obama, on the other hand, with very little relevant experience, ran a superb campaign.

So much for that argument