>>>b. people actually point to "experience" in government as a reason to elect someone.
>>
>>Would you let a teenager without a driver license drive a truck with gasoline in a densely populate area?
>
>Wow! How did you come up with that analogy?
>Are you saying that experience trumps integrity?
>I've been following the Bridgegate trial here.
>One of the clear takeaways is that politicians do almost nothing connected with the running of the government.
>Civil servants and unelected bureaucrats run the government.
>At least in NY and NJ,the minute they are elected, politicians focus on two things ...
>a-getting re-elected
>b-socking some money away for a rainy day.
>So, my grandson could probably make a better governor of NJ than the current felon because he wouldn't be stealing.

But that is just a small piece of the puzzle. There is a lot of tings involved being the leader of a nation like the United States - and someone that hasn't spent 1 minute of their 70+ years on this planet doing any public service work with zero political experience and is so thin skinned they can go wacko over a damn tweet has no business being president. You may not like Hillary - she may rub you the wrong way - but at least when she does it's just an expression. You don't have to like HRC to admit she's qualified for the job - and arguably one of the most qualified candidates ever to run. Trump has nothing on his resume that applies to this type of job. I again say that the American voter is stupid, as this is the one they've picked to represent the GOP. 320 million people in the USA - and THIS is the jackass they pick? Coooome on man!