I would assume that Obama's handlers are the ones really running his campaign.
Just like the workers and not the CEO runs the corporations, right MSgt?
It dawned on me why those so politically tone-deaf can't understand the simple straight-line reality that running a political campaign organization truly IS the only meaningful direct comparison as to how the same person might operate as POTUS. Let me elaborate:
Being POTUS is a multi faceted job.
Running to become POTUS is a multi-faceted job.
The POTUS must anticipate the needs of this nation and its government while orchestrating those working for him on accomplishing the day-to-day tasks efficiently as a reflection of the POTUS' own personal style.
Same holds true for the people running for POTUS. If a candidate cannot run an efficient campaign, why should one believe they'd run an efficient government?
The POTUS' organization must compile, move and react to an endless stream of information, from politics to pop culture, so that the POTUS is aware and involved in all the things requiring his attention at any given time.
Ditto for the people running for POTUS.
The POTUS has to understand and articulate his views and messages to the American people, his employers while gaining their trust without abusing it with lapses of judgment and outright errors of commission or omission.
Same with the person running for POTUS with the exception of being in the PROCESS of gaining said trust through the results of a plebiscite which offers the electorate more than just one option.
The POTUS has to surround themselves with a cohesive team that deals with all that pertains to our entire federal government, including national security issues, economic issues and all things above below and in between.
The candidate has to articulate virtually everything they would DO as POTUS including the ongoing judgments formed by how efficiently and effectively their own staff mirrors that of the POTUS in delivering responses and anticipatory statements regarding the issues being dealt with currently and those needing solutions in the future. Also, since POTUS examples number 43, everyone is able to form opinions on how the totality of a nominee's campaign reflects that of previous POTUS' the individual personally deemed successful.
Bottom line, and I hope all can see where I'm going:
Running for the POTUS is the closest thing to the actual EXPERIENCE of being POTUS because both are held to the exact same standard by the people who do or will employ them. If a candidate shows themselves unable to voice the electorate's concerns while running, why would the people elect them to go against the people's wishes?
Obama's 18-month journey is the experience which demonstrates his abilities to navigate the same waters as the POTUS without his decrees being followed by the government as are the sitting POTUS'. He has shown a grasp of the politics, he has demonstrated his management style and acumen, and he's been tested on the international stage by many of its major players. He has placed all his policy objectives out for all to view if they bother to read them at his website, and he's open to changing his mind, as he did on offshore drilling, at the behest of the public's will.
To me, this is concrete example of "experience" at work for over 18 months. What could possibly be more important than running a defacto "shadow government" and running it with efficiency, strong fiduciary skills, the complete loyalty of subordinates, and seeking the counsel of wise people before making brash decisions?
He is his experience and his experience is him. One doesn't have to like how he does it or what he says, but please don't ignore just how much these prior 18 months have given him as it regards "on-the-job-training" while it's given US a front-row seat to compare him to McCain over the same period, which far too many seem to ignore.
