change in the primaries means different things than in the general election. if obama is the democrat nominee, the democrats are going to get spanked. as much as we don't want to admit it, middle class america still is extremely nervous about having an african-american as president.

we as republicans want him to be the democrat nominee. he guarantees a pub in office in '09

i don't think bush lacks "intellectual capability" he's just plain ignorant, and prefers to remain so which makes it worse than not having the "intellectual capability". it's true people want a change, but we shall see. let us wait until the candidates are required to pass the "loyalty test"

this election is for demoCraps only. they can win it or lose it ~ the republiCons cannot win. as far as republiCons wanting obama to be the nominee ~ i don't think so. hillary will energize their base obama won't

The same "experienced" people you are looking for are the ones that served us this shit sandwich in the first place. They have consistently and methodically sold the American people short for the sake of political partisanship. THAT is why we are in the fix we're in with healthcare, defense, education, taxes, the whole litany of problems and challenges that this country faces are a direct result of those "experienced" people you tout.

Hillary? No way. If she became a 2-term President, that would mean that there could be US Representatives that weren't born the last time someone with a name other than Clinton or Bush sat in the Oval Ofice. 28 years of it. That's bullshit, and the rumbling you feel in the eastern half of the country is the body of every single Revolutionary War soldier and founding father of this country spinning in their graves at that prospect. That ain't what they were fightin' for.

Perhaps we should never have had some of our greatest Presidents. After all, Lincoln served all of teo years in the US House 11 years before his election as President. What were George Washington's qualifications? I'd say his task was far more daunting than any other President has ever faced with the possible exception of FDR or Lincoln. Speaking of FDR, what about his qualifications? He was a state senator, and Ass't Sec. of the Navy, and a governor. He was never a US Senator or Rep. He was only a governor for 4 years. What about Woodrow Wilson? He spent 2 years as governor of New Jersey. Before that? He was a lecturer in Constitutional Law (sound familiar?) at NYU Law.

Obama has a degree in international relations. Think that might come in handy when trying to restore our country's standing in the world community?

He's the smartest candidate out there. I don't know about you, but for me that is the biggest part of the job: having the smarts to look at a situation and wrap your brain around it to find the best sloution. If I am electing someone as President, I'd prefer it if, when he walks into a room full of international leaders, he's the smartest guy in the room.

Don't let this crap about "qualifications" sway you. Listen to what he says he will do. If you like it, vote for him. If you don't, vote for someone else. But the only "qualifications" necessary for a President are:

The rest is opinion.

6 years in the US House, almost 8 in the Senate.

__________________
Tax & Spend > Borrow & Spend

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

Every feeling you've ever felt can be found in the works of Beethoven, Bruckner, Mahler, and Wagner.

Let's face it most people vote with their emotions, not with their reason. Emotionally and viscerally Obama comes off like the White(?) Knight, while HC looks like the wicked witch. This kind of response doomed Kerry, but this time it will still elect a Dem, as the cycle has changed. The cycle being: OK let's try something different.