Because the experience necessary to run, and more importantly lead, the most complex enterprise in the history of mankind in no way compares to getting Meals on Wheels up and running in the local neighborhood.

So did Jimmy Carter and it didn't help him at all. In fact it was his experience as President that got him fired.

Romney stepped down because he did the math and could not win. He was and is a realist, one of the few in politics. Romney, and many Republicans, actually knew McCain would lose.

People in general, and the world opinion, may like Obama, and I admit he is a likable guy. But his personal likability, or his apologies, have not produced any tangible results in foreign policy. I don't believe him to be all that respected by foreign leaders, and he certainly is not feared. He is not even feared in his own party. Nations act in their own self interest, not because their populations happen to like our president. Witness the lack of real cooperation in Afghanistan by our NATO allies. Yes they sent support troops to work in the offices, be police, clean the latrines and cook. But put them out front to pull triggers on the bad guys? Not a chance. And no amount of Obama charm will make them do it.

And my friend, you once again, miss my point. But I do admire your consistency. Hard, difficult, real world experience of difficult decisions with consequences to those choices is absolutely mandatory for success in any leadership endeavor. If you don't have it, you fail. Obama has not acquired that experience in his life. Political experience is like frosting, it makes the cake better but its not the cake. A couple of spoonfuls of frosting and one grows quickly tired of it. Which is what is happening with Obama. If he can't produce real measurable results he's finished.

Absolutely, although my particular industry is not the point. Had he done anything in his life that required him to produce genuine, quantifiable results I would have found him more capable of being POTUS.

Which is why Romney is much more appealing. His results in non-political areas are clear and measurable. Obama for 48 years of living has produced nothing of genuine substance that can be measured against objective standards. Nothing.

I got the joke and you missed the point. I actually watch the Daily Show often. I will make it blunt so even you kids can get it. Obama has never accomplished anything that has quantifiable measurements in in his life. He looks good and talks well...with a teleprompter...that's it. There's nothing wrong with academic elitists. We actually need them. Except when they pretend to be chief executives and then they create horrible messes, which we are witnessing in real time with Obama.

The obvious answer is that if you believe that the job of a professional politician is somehow analogous or compares to say, the what Jack Welch did at GE...well there's nothing we have to talk about on such a subject.

I am 49 and have worked in the custom aviation business since 1985. That's called a real job and career to all you kids. Where if you don't produce quantifiable results you get fired...or worse people get killed.

He is an ideological driven...

I will certainly give him credit for not closing Guantanamo and following the Bush policies in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is also following the Bush policies of massive deficit spending on a staggering scale. Ideologues adhere to arguments that are contradicted by reality. Obama's initiatives with cap and trade, health care and all the bail outs clearly show he is ideologically driven in his policies and choices. Realist's would never pose or support such nonsense.

not had a legitimate job...

I do not consider jobs where one is not held accountable for results to be legitimate. No better example on planet earth could be found than a university professor.

What is needed now more that anything is a leader with experience and skills...

So how bankrupt will this nation be while Obama figures how to lead? And by the way, if you're 48 years old and haven't figured it out, it ain't happening....

Thank you and Jon Stewart for making my point! Please show me Obama's chamber he designed and built himself. That's the point..he's never actually done anything. Designing and building requires lots of skill and experience that comes from trying and failing and trying again. People make the constant mistake of assuming that because one looks good and speaks well they have capabilities to lead and manage. They often don't. For those of of us who have spent decades in careers where results matter and if you don't produce you get fired its very easy to spot someone who has never had to. Obama has never been accountable for results...Romney has.

Your point that a professional politician qualifies as a legitimate job is so absurd it simply cannot be commented on.

Yes of course Romney would. It is now painfully obvious that Obama lacks any real world leadership or management skills. He is an ideological driven academic elitist that has not had a legitimate job in his life. His fortunes have risen by good looks, charm and the ability to speak well. All necessary skills for the best leaders but such cannot be the substitute for hard experience solving demanding, complex problems. Its like eating frosting with no cake, tasty for second of two but one grows quickly tired and sick of it.

On the contrary, Romney spent a long private career solving exactly those kind of problems. He knows success and failure. Name Obama's biggest failure. Can't? Did he not have any? That should tell you loads. Romney lost a Senate race and a Presidential campaign. And I guarantee he saw many failures and mistakes in the private investing world. You know more about a person from failures than successes.

The US government is the largest, most complex enterprise in the history of mankind. Romney has accumulated long experience diagnosing and solving such problems. What is needed now more that anything is a leader with experience and skills. Romney has it, Obama doesn't.