If executive experience is so important, why didn't George W. Bush do a better job as president?

Question

I mean, the smartest decision he made in office was to implement the surge, and it took sweeping defeats of Republicans in 2006 to convince him to do that.

Answer 1

right on

Answer 2

Executive experience is not proof that one will be a capable executive.  It is still better than none.  No one knows how the president will do, not even the potential president.  So we look at what they've done in the past to measure how we think they might do, and if they have nothing, that's not good!  You don't get high positions in a career without experience, why should you get to serve in the highest office in the US without it?

Don't be an idiot, you do understand this.  You know that it's better to have some experience with anything if you hope to be good at it.  Usually the first time someone tries something, the result is not as good as it could have been.

Answer 3

I seem to recall neocons touting Dubya's MBA and how great of a fiscal leader he would be as well.

The govt. is drowning in $600 billion of red ink this year, and a cumulative total of over $4 trillion in 8 years.  A CEO of a private company would have been ran out of town on a rail with those kind of failing numbers.