NPR: Does Experience Matter in a President?

Does Experience Matter in a President?

"Experience never exists in isolation; it is always a factor that coexists with temperament, training, background, spiritual outlook and a host of other factors ... Character is your magic word, it seems to me -- not just what they've done but how they've done it and what they've learned from doing it."

That's a quote from presidential historian Richard Norton Smith taken from one of a pair of articles in Time magazine about experience and just how much of it you really need to be a good president.

In a piece entitled "The Science of Experience," writer John Cloud says it is generally accepted that it takes about ten years for a person to learn to become an "expert" in any particular field. But "while 10 years is a necessary minimum to achieve expertise in most fields, it doesn't guarantee success. As Anders Ericsson writes in the introduction to the 901-page Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (2006), 'The number of years of experience in a domain is a poor predictor of attained performance.' "

Ericsson's primary finding is that rather than mere experience or even raw talent, it is dedicated, slogging, generally solitary exertion -- repeatedly practicing the most difficult physical tasks for an athlete, repeatedly performing new and highly intricate computations for a mathematician -- that leads to first-rate performance. And it should never get easier; if it does, you are coasting, not improving.

Is the same true for presidents? In his article on presidents and experience, David Von Dredle points out that some of the men considered among the greatest presidents, such as Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy, had far less experience then their rivals. But Ronald Reagan and FDR both had valuable experience as governors of large states.

He quotes Jim Baker, the former Secretary of State, who found that experience was a problem when he ran George H.W. Bush's presidential campaign in 1980, but it was exactly what was needed to help him win in 1988: "... there's no such thing as presidential experience outside of the office itself." The quality we ought to seek, says Baker, "is leadership."

3:00 PM ET | 02-29-2008 | permalink

Comments (Send a comment)

Its not the experience of the canidate running for office, as it is the experience of the voter's with the candidate's words and actions.

This is where the "Obama Experience" is lacking. Obama is the rising star of Illinois politics. But before giving his speech at the last Dem. convention, who ever heard of him?
Who knew he was half-white?
Who knew his mom was from Kansas?
Who knew Obama's middle name?
Who knew anything about him?

Conversely, in the minds of voters, Hillary has TOO MUCH experience. Her campaigning for NAFTA, for Universal (government paid) Healthcare, for Vince Foster, for her remarks about "the vast right-wing conspiracy". The Clinton "co-presidency"!

Fair or not, she also has to contend with her last name. Bill Clinton's time in office is filled with numerous examples of how "the ends DON'T justify the means". A White House that couldn't make a decsion without taking 3 polls!

As mentioned several times by Jody Sol, Fred Cammora Call (other bloggers here), and myself:
We are all after the same things.
Stable monetary policy.
Low unemployment. Good jobs.
Affordable housing.
Stable prices for food, energy
And a government that does not tax OR spend us into oblivion (I don't mind paying my FAIR share).

The difference is HOW we are going to get these things done!
Who is going to pay for them and for how long.
That's the MEANS!

The ends NEVER justify the means!
just do the right thing, at the right time, the right way, for the right reasons!

All of this partisan, backroom, underhanded, closed-session, midnight dealmaking, say-one-thing and do-another, in-fighting at every turn, of furthering YOUR interests at MY expense is the kind of experience I have seen from everyone except:
John McCain

I, in my experience watching John McCain, can trust that he will do the right thing! He doesn't blow smoke up your (anything)!

Which is why SOME ultra-nationalist, homophobic, xenophobic, stamp-out Darwin, "church-going" conservatives have had such a tough time supporting him. HE IS TOO HONEST for them.

Have a good weekend.

Sent by Harold | 4:32 PM ET | 02-29-2008

I'd say experience is secondary to some other aspects. Of course we are assuming political experience. A candidates life experience is probably more important than professional experience, especially childhood.

I am more interested in a candidates reasoning abilities, since what we really need in a policy maker, is not party dogma, but the ability to compare policy strategies and evaluate which are the most beneficial (and least hazardous) for society.

Most of our political leaders have no idea how to do that, because we elect them to try and force our own personal philosophies on the rest of the nation. Essentially we've become a nation of fascists fighting for control. And we all lose.

Sent by Jody Sol | 5:12 PM ET | 02-29-2008

Hey you guys. You forgot the first one. I know he did not have any presidential experience and had not even a role model. You all know; it is G. Washington that I refer to.

Sent by Dave Rosen | 9:53 PM ET | 02-29-2008

I agree 100 percent with you Jody. you couldn't be more right. But you do realize that these people who have the years and years of experience tend to think they know it all and they know what's best for us independant of what we think. I have a huge problem with the politics of looking at a potential president with this savior mentality. no one person no matter how charismatic or experienced they are is going to singlehandedly turn our fortunes around. Any politician who says they can is completely full of themselves. It is going to take a collective of us to figure our way out of this thing. we just need someone in office that will be good enough to listen to good ideas from all sides.

Sent by J.A. WILSON | 10:42 PM ET | 02-29-2008

I think people who do not have a driver license should be allowed to race in the Indy 500.

And someone who has never played a game of American football should be the starting quarterback in next year's Super Bowl.

Why not let someone who has never had a fight in their life, fight for the heavyweight championship of the world?

And while we are at it, why not give those who've never had any experience in aircraft mechanics work for commercial airlines fixing the airplanes we fly aboard?

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 9:47 AM ET | 03-01-2008

Sent by Dave Rosen: You all know; it is G. Washington that I refer to.

Let's see, Dave. George Washington led the newly formed Continental Army against the most powerful army of the world at the time, the British Army.....and that DOES NOT constitute experience?

Then, pray tell, what does constitute experience? A lot of us are curious what the liberal definition of experience is.

Wanted: Air Line Pilot. No experience needed.

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 10:24 AM ET | 03-01-2008

I'm more concerned about positions than experience. If a candidate has a different position on issues that are important to me, then they might as well forget about getting support from me, regardless of how experienced they might be. Case in point, McCain: he doesn't want me to have equal rights, so, case closed, as far as I am concerned.

Also, if a candidate changes their position, that's fine, as long as they provide a reasonable explanation for it. Even if they have switched to my position on an issue, if it looks like they are just pandering, that doesn't win me over either.

Sent by JP | 11:51 AM ET | 03-01-2008

Experience without judgement is experieince in making mistakes; and experience without the ability to learn, accept one's mistakes and change is plain stupidity. Many of the people in government have one year experience multiplied by the years of service. (That's HER case, I think). Leadership, I believe, trumps the experience card; and it is part of leadership to have good enough judgement to surround oneself with valuable and knowledgeable people who then become part of the collective experience of the leader. At the end,the leader still has to use JUDGEMENT, something which was in very short supply at the time the disastrous, ill-conceived, catastrophic,and impulsive Iraq war was started by a man with ADD,and inmaturity to boot, and with the experience of 1 year times 10, and a bunch of other elected, and "experienced" officials who failed to check the facts and, most of all, to THINK.

Sent by Leonel A. Urdaneta | 12:38 PM ET | 03-01-2008

Sent by JP: Case in point, McCain: he doesn't want me to have equal rights, so, case closed, as far as I am concerned.

Interesting assumption.

You do know that liberals are said to make blanket statements without logic or foundation other than emotional appeal.

So, exactly what equal rights has John McCain denied you, JP? If you could be more specific about what Constitutional right you have been denied, that would be interesting to hear about.

And how did John McCain personally lead the movement to strip you of your personal Constitutional rights?

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 1:41 PM ET | 03-01-2008

Sent by Leonel A. Urdaneta: ill-conceived, catastrophic,and impulsive Iraq war was started by a man with ADD,and inmaturity to boot,

Spoken as a Liberal who opposed the war in Iraq and who will undoubtedly vote for Barack Obama and a diminished role of the military in American foreign policy.

Those who supported the war in Iraq will undoubtedly vote for John McCain and a continued strong military presence in American foreign policy.

The choices in November are rather clear cut. Liberals opposed to the war in Iraq for Obama. Conservatives supporting the war in Iraq for McCain.

What's so hard to figure out how the November elections are going to divide up?

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 3:50 PM ET | 03-01-2008

The problem is that in the state of today???s world we cannot afford to have ???amateurs ???running for the presidency. It has become virtually impossible for a person to run for the presidency unless they are :a) fantastically wealthy, or b) politically correct and loved by the ???media???, or c) backed by some liberal or conservative ???sugar daddy??? who while lacking the guts to run him/herself wishes to manipulate the system with his/ her fortune. The time has come to demand some minimum job qualifications for the office of President of the USA. These should include, though not exclusively so, a practical working knowledge of the constitution, some understanding of economics and monetary policy, a through understanding of the current state of world affairs, and having served in a branch of the government for a minimal amount of time to hone the skills of working with peoples of divergent opinions. Perhaps before they can register to run they should have to pass an extensive examination, rather like professionals must before entering their respective schools. Finally limit absolutely what can be spent on the election by either candidate by using only public funds and making the media provide equal, free time on the airways to both candidates. This should be part of the Medias requirement to obtain licenses to broadcast. Have a set number of national debates with NEUTRAL INTERVIEWERS not ???celebrity news people trying to show how clever they are. Polls should be dispensed with. Let people make up their own minds!! Perhaps it is time to amend the Constitution to require more of our leaders.

Sent by R. Bruni | 6:20 PM ET | 03-01-2008

I was just wondering if Mr. Commorra Call realized how blatantantly hipopcritical his previous statement is that liberals are prone to make blanket statements without foundation?

Sent by bogman | 8:53 PM ET | 03-01-2008

I am not worried about who Obama is colour or religion when he is not an old member of washington he should be the one. America is now like a dynasty from clinton to Bush. Chelsie was in Hawai for or on behalf of her mother is she the next Democratic candidate? America is or should be tied of washington insiders or veterans who seems to loose sence of dierctions they should be sidelined and let the changes begin.

Sent by ebenezer akrong | 5:23 AM ET | 03-02-2008

How can the question of "does experience matter" even be asked (or read?) with a straight face? The fact that this question is taken seriously is clearly in support of candidate Obama. Why? Because he lacks it! Yet this lack of experience somehow is conveniently being overlooked by the media and many supporters. That sums up this entire race for the Democratic nomination. People prefer Obama because he is vague, and his nicely-spoken "I'm not one of THEM," politician's speech is what the public is ready to hear. We live in a culture raised on TV, and that is determining the future of our country. If he gets the job, we will see if on-the-job-training is a good idea, or not. What a huge gamble to make at a very critical time in history.
His message of "hope" sounds more like "trust me", with little record to show, and the idea of "change" will happen no matter who takes the next role as president. We just want smart change for the BEST!

Sent by AR | 7:14 PM ET | 03-02-2008

Send a Comment

Comments are reviewed and edited by NPR prior to display. All comments will be read, but not all will be posted.

NPR reserves the right to read on the air and/or publish on its Web site or in any medium now known or unknown the e-mails and letters that we receive. We may edit them for clarity or brevity and identify authors by name and location. For additional information, please consult our Terms of Use.

E-mail this Page

Recipient's e-mail address:	» Up to twelve addresses, separated by commas.
Your e-mail address:
Your name:
Personal message (optional, 600 characters max):
Your NPR member station:
Are you a member of your local NPR station?	Yes No
Would you like to receive information from your local NPR member station? (see NPR's privacy policy)	Yes No
May we contact you with information about NPR programming and services? (see NPR's privacy policy)	Yes No

(Information collected by NPR will be used solely for internal NPR or NPR member station purposes and only if you selected 'yes' above. See NPR's privacy policy for more information.)

Tom Regan

Blogger

About Us

This year's election cycle has been one of the most exciting in memory. At the NPR News Blog we'll do our best to bring you interesting, informative -- and controversial -- stories from our own reporters and bloggers, as well as the rest of the best of the Internet and blogosphere. And we hope you'll let us know what you think as well.

Want to learn more? Be sure to read our Frequently Asked Questions and our discussion guidelines.