If choosing our leaders based on something as simple as their resume, qualifications, and experience makes sense to you, why do ask how many presidents have ascended the political ladder in sensible, gradient steps?
That's actually beside the point of whether or not the American people ought to elect presidents with little or no executive experience or accomplishment. I contend that we should not.
The fact is, these sorts of promotions don't happen anywhere else but in government, most often with disastrous consequences. You hardly ever see this happen in the private sector (the real world), and when you do, it's almost always accompanied by mismanagement and disaster.
As for selling you on someone else, it's incumbent on you to look over the field and study the resumes and backgrounds of the potential candidates. I've done enough due diligence on the field for myself, to have made my own choice.
In the two years since Obama's been leading us to Hell in a hand basket, I've spent countless hours arguing the merits of various potential candidates with Freepers and others. Frankly, I think that I and others have already exhausted every conceivable angle of every likely contender. There's only one left standing, as far as I'm concerned.
I think you’re being unnecessarily cryptic. If you support Palin above all others, great. I would vote for her in preference to the current office occupant, and would happier see her there than the vast majority of the field. Don’t make me ask a third time to just state plainly who you think should be president - I’m not a mind-reader, and part of what you’re pointing out as my responsibility to make myself aware of suitable candidates is in discussions like this.
This is more interrogation than discussion though if you’re asking me questions without answering the ones I’ve asked you.