Lessig should apply his analysis to Obama. He has no executive experience and hasn't even served a full term in the Senate. Palin may be unqualified according to Lessig's standards, but by the same standards, Obama is even more unqualified.

This seems wrong and suggests that a Lessig-style analysis is not appropriate. The candidates' fitness should not be judged not by experience, but by their desirability relative to the other candidates based on their policies and their likely ability to execute.

As an analogy, when betting on a boxing match, a comparison of each boxer's record is not as helpful as an analysis of the boxers' strengths and weaknesses relative to each other.

You can say that, but it doesn't make it true. Her only experience of substance is being governor of one of the least populous states of the Union for less than two years.

I'll say the same thing I said when it was Obama vs Hillary. I'd rather have a stupid, inexperienced, incompetent friend than a smart, experienced, highly skilled enemy.

I would much prefer to see Palin fail miserably at reducing corruption than see Biden successfully reduce civil liberties (for those unfamiliar with Biden's record, http://news.yahoo.com/s/cnet/20080824/tc_cnet/83011357831002... ).

This is exactly what people said about GWB.

Until they found out that he had a higher GPA than Gore, and that Kerry's Navy Officer Qualification Test put him at the 50th percentile in a group with average SATs of 1100 -- 100 points behind Bush.

First off. This isn't hacker news.

Second, who really cares about experience? Bush came in as pretty experienced and then gained even more experience in his first term. Did that affect his behavior in the 2nd term? If anything, it may have made him more confident. Someone who lacks experience may not be so confident and that can be a good thing.

How is this Hacker News? Seams like Reddit content to me.

All I know is my vote is heavily influenced by YouTube videos. Whichever candidate gets their YouTube in just before I close the curtain is probably getting my +1.

Now we just need some lolcats and our journey to the dark side will be complete.

Wow! comparing Palin to Chester Allen Arthur, BURN!

While I don't know how Obama would come out ("qualified" or "unqualified") in a Lessig-style analysis (which is, more or less, just a rhetorical style), this talk shows some pitfalls of one-to-one comparison. One pitfall being that Lessig's Power Point format (something he's carried over from his Free Culture lectures) glosses over what one DID as Senator, Mayor, Secretary of War, etc. These are titles (just like Major, Congressperson, VP) but the eras and jobs have changed.

Also, in saying that Palin is "qualified" or "unqualified," Lessig (slyly, but brilliantly) does what he seems to rail against: classifying a political figure into a pass/no-pass binary through a series of soundbites.

Impressively put together presentation. Clear, concise, yet comprehensive.

Didn't Chester A. Arthur become president?