I think inexperience was and continues to be a problem for Obama. To some degree, McCain has taken that off the table with Palin. I can think of three responses to Trippi's question (each of which is, at best, a partial response, but each is real).

First, Palin has more executive experience than Obama. The shortcuts I've seen many in the media use "she has the same amount of experience" or "she is less experienced" (by those doing a simple days to days count" are both wrong.

Second, I don't think inexperience will be McCain's main avenue of attack. I think he will hit more on goals and values (Ayers? Alinsky? Wright?), a place where Obama is more vulnerable. Also, Obama's inexperience is well known and has already had all the effect it's going to have.

Third, while Palin may need to be more ready than your typical VP (because McCain's age), the fact is she will be second in command for some period of time--the best crash course in presidential experience a politician can ever have, whereas Obama will be in charge from day one. He will have "on the job training" in a way she will not.

Palin has the same amount of experience as Governor that Pelosi has as Speaker.
Besides, Obama still has no executive experience.
I agree, though, that Obama's close association with totalitarians and terrorists is vastly more significant.

Clinton was my candidate and I thought she had better and broader experience. I've always expressed concerns about Obama's pandering to the right and would have felt more comfortable with him as a candidate if he had more experience. Unfortunately for me, we ended up with Obama vs McCain instead of Clinton vs McCain. Regardless of who the Democratic candidate is, I have great concerns about a McCain administration. When adding in their running mates, I found that Obama's choice gave me more confidence in the ticket whereas McCain's made me fear for this country even more than I had previously.

Obama shows the willingness to choose those who will help his presidency; I get the feeling that the republicans will just do as they please and not be willing to even consider the judgment/opinions of those who are not engaged in the groupthink that continues to dog the current administration.

We can argue that Palin's experience is at least equal to Obama's. But he is at the top of the ticket and she is not. It is likely she will have some time to gain expertise in areas where she is weak.

In the event she ever has to assume permanently the Presidency, she will then nominate a person for vice-president. She certainly could pick someone who would complement her knowledge and experience in a way similar to how Obama presumably selected Biden.

So, why is her experience an issue?

"Obama shows the willingness to choose those who will help his presidency; I get the feeling that the republicans will just do as they please and not be willing to even consider the judgment/opinions of those who are not engaged in the groupthink that continues to dog the current administration."

1: How is Palin at all related to alleged current administration "groupthink?"

2: McCain is reviled by some conservatives for not being ideologically pure enough and for working with Democrats on certain issues, while Obama--when he actually deigned to vote something other than "Present"--has a record of invariably voting his party's line.

Welcome aboard the Logic Train, though I suspect you'll be getting off at the next stop, cognitive dissonance.

Experience can't be an issue when you look at Abraham Lincoln's experience: he had just one term as a Representative. The problem with Obama, rather, is his policies, and his hidden agenda. I think he is the first major anti-American candidate since Henry Wallace, but at least we knew who Wallace was. Who actually knows anything about Obama? There is a real danger this time. And just when you thought Kerry was the worst the Democrats could come up with.

Regarding the comment that "Obama shows the willingness to choose those who will help his presidency", I have a much darker interpretation of Biden's selection. I think Biden is earmarked for slaughter if Obama wins, which will then allow Obama to choose a like-minded helper for his hidden anti-American plans.

Wow: Sarah Palin is about to become a grandma - but she's still a bad ass

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn7UzxXv8p4

There are fifteen Presidents who at one time served as US Senator. Of those fifteen Senators who later became President, there were only two who were directly elected from the US Senate to the Presidency: Warren Harding and John Kennedy. Of the fifteen Presidents who had served in the US Senate, there is only one whose previous experience involved none of the following: military, US vice-president, US cabinet member, US Congressman, state governor. That would be Warren Harding. Note that also describes Senator Obama.

Those odds don’t look very good to me.

Source: Wikipedia and Whitehouse.gov

ol cranky - yeah, keep voting those "feelings." That's always a reliable way to think.

Bob Thomson is right. After one year as VP, that will be more training in the presidency than everyone running has now, even McCain.

Gringo-

You might have a good point if you didn't have to include US Congressman in that list. I think you'd be hard pressed to defend a bright line distinction between the House and the Senate.

So your statistic is a bit like the always amusing, "This batter is 4 for 5 against left handed pitchers in away games after the seventh inning stretch when his team is behind by fewer than three runs..."

My favorite oddball stat is still the one where the 50th, 49th, and 48th states are all represented among the four people in at the top of the two tickets. And Biden represents the 1st state.

metro1-

The mention of her soon-to-be-grandmotherly status makes me wonder...

... how long before someone describes her as a GILF?

I love how "ol cranky" criticizes the current administration of "groupthink." Yeah, because you never find liberal Democrats involved in groupthink. They're so individualistic and independent-minded, you know.

Clint: it turns out that if you exclude House of Representatives from the metric, you still end up with only Harding.

So, I rephrase:
Of the fifteen Presidents who had served in the US Senate, there is only one whose previous experience involved none of the following: military, US vice-president, US cabinet member, state governor. That would be Warren Harding. Note that also describes Senator Obama.
Those odds don't look good to me.

How about them apples?

Those odds don’t look very good to me.