It seems that both parties have a valid question as to the experience of both Obama and Palin. Should we change the constitution to be more specific as to what qualifies a person to run for high office ?Do we as a nation need to raise the qualifications for President and VP ?No! Except for probably James Garfield, the best man to be President at the time probably never was. And Garfield was shot six months into his term.
Had their been %26quot;qualifications%26quot; for VP, Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman would have never made it.
The country deserves who they elect. Simple as that.
Do we as a nation need to raise the qualifications for President and VP ?
That's a loaded question because there are several presidents that probably would not qualify for the position by today's standards and that includes someone like George Washington.
I think the Constitution is fine the way it is. A few general requirements are all that are needed.
One of the problems today is that with the modern media the right people tend not to make it through the primaries either because of an image problem, a lack of charisma or because the media does not give them the attention the deserve.
For example, in this past set of primaries there were people I would consider more qualified that the frontrunners. These include candidates like Biden, Richardson, Dodd, Paul, Guiliani and Thompson. But due to a lot of factors (some named above) they were not taken as seriously as some candidates with much less experience including Obama and Clinton.
Some old timers like Lincoln and Roosevelt would never have made it in today's election cycle but they are two of the faces on Mt. Rushmore.
I would like to see people become less image conscience and more issues conscience. But I don't see that happening any time soon. The general public gets what the ask for.
Do we as a nation need to raise the qualifications for President and VP ?
wake up!!!! listen too me and try to understand this....from the first to the president who is sitting in office never had any experience to president. if you check their background and you will see most of them never been president before, their experience range from being a diplomatic, survey, secretary of state, a minister to france, to war Generals to senators and to governor.
Next time that any one open their mouth about someone doesn't have the experience to run for president of this country, they need to check the facts. if you were paying attention in your history or civil class about our government you will know that you have to be; Only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both citizens of the U.S.) may be president of the United States.
One must also be at least 35 years of age to be president.
Finally, one must live in the United States for at least 14 years to be president, in addition to being a natural-born citizen.
now if you have read this and look up the requirements to become president of united states.
Good question, but I don't think so. Becoming President is very difficult, so ideally, the American people should be able to sort through all the possibilities and choose the best to run in November. Let's not forget that the Democrats and Republicans had about 30 potential Presidential candidates between them. I don't think either candidate was the best their party had to offer, but they did both go through a rigorous selection process.
Anyone smart enough to be a good president is smart enough to not want to be president. Maybe we should just find the American with the highest IQ and force him/her to run.
