When judging the criteria upon which one makes a decision about whom to support, or vote for, as President of the United States, inevitably one has to weigh one form of experience as more important than others, as it is rare for a candidate, let alone a nominee to possess them all.
There is Political Experience. Campaigning for election, advocating policy, spinning the debate, etc.
There is Legislative Experience. Proposing and voting on legislation, working with others, the art of compromise, etc.
There is Executive Experience. Being on the initiating and deciding ends of command decisions in law and at the POTUS level, foreign/military policy.
There is Business Experience. Meeting a payroll, dealing with government regulation and employer/employee decision-making, etc.
There is Military Experience. Learning the pro's/con's of socialized bureaucracy, command and subservience, up close firsthand, teaches valuable lessons on the efficacy of government programs.
There is Life Experience. Being a spouse, parent, grandparent, p.o.w., first lady, or simply living long enough to have seen a ton of shit go down and process it all for future reference.
Becoming POTUS changes the people who attain it. In some ways for the better, other ways for the worse, it always is a mix of both. There is always a major deviation from a campaign promise, and always a surprise 180 degree turn from expected action due to character/history. (Nixon/China, Reagan/Arms Control, etc.)
Thus, no matter who you support, or who gets elected, the result is always a crap shoot/roll of the dice.
