Charles C.W. Cooke at National Review has an interesting piece that seems to both reinforce and undercut this notion. It turns out that Republicans polled tend to (as expected) prefer experience in general, and experience as a Governor in particular. But when actual names are attached, to the questions, these guidelines seem to go out the window, with Marco Rubio besting Jeb Bush, Scott Walker and other governors.
This article really encapsulated my personal conundrum with this election. I'm one of those "experience" Republicans; I think the disaster of the Obama Administration reinforces the notion that experience actually counts for something. This causes me to be very tough on Marco Rubio, and have more comfort with Jeb Bush. But there is the beating heart of someone who desperately wants to win this election inside of me, and the more I watch and study, the more Rubio looks like a winner.
A good friend of mine is a huge Rubio backer, and when I pressed him on the whole experience thing and specifically pointed to the disaster of the Obama Administration, he made the following case: "You think the Obama Administration is a disaster because of his inexperience? The Obama Administration is a disaster because of its POLICIES! You may think he is inexperienced, but what has that held him back from accomplishing? He's gotten most everything he's wanted to do, done--and the truth is, you (me) hate it all."
I've got a lot of thinking to do, and I've been watching virtually every speech given by a both of those men. I've also taken to watching Carly Fiorina speak, as to this point, no one in the field is better before an audience.
We've got some work to do folks, wading through this field chaff to get to the wheat. But don't let me hear any of you complaining about "all politicians are alike", or "it doesn't matter who runs". This field of Republicans is incredibly diverse in terms of experience and ideas, and if you can't find someone in this field close to your leanings, than you probably ought not be a Republican.