America is embarking on a new presidential era and is looking closely at what makes the best candidate. Experience is something that we all respect and seek in life. We expect our doctors to have spent years in the operating room, our lawyers to be well seasoned in the field. And for the most part, it pays off. It’s a wonder then why campaigns aren’t composed of wizened statesmen. If all things made sense, we would seek out the most practiced politicians, elect one, and have four years of peace and prosperity. Only, it doesn’t work out like that, and there’s a reason why. Experience doesn’t always serve us best.

One just has to look into past presidents to see why. Just for a second, think of the best presidents and write down who comes to mind. Chances are, your list includes Lincoln, Wilson, both Roosevelts and possibly Reagan. It’s no surprise that these four usually occupy spots in top lists, but what do they all have in common? What trait is in these men that we should seek in future leaders? Oddly enough, it’s lack of experience. Each of them had less experience in politics going into the Oval Office than current candidate Barack Obama, whose own lack of experience has been seen as detrimental.

So why is it that a president like FDR, with his two years as Governor of New York, managed to uplift an entire nation while a president like James Buchanan, arguably the most experienced president to date, failed to stop the Civil War? The answer is simple; experience, when it comes to presidents, is something that can’t be trusted. Now that’s not to count experience out. The Founding Fathers who served as the first presidents were some of the most seasoned presidents. Years in politics seem to have served them well, especially during the first crucial years of the nation. But then again, that leaves the question. What did they have that Buchanan didn’t?

Perhaps it was the fact that they themselves founded the nation, a drive to preserve their own work. Franklin Roosevelt’s battle with polio might have helped to strengthen his resolve as a leader. Good leaders are usually excellent people themselves .At the same time, morally bankrupt leaders usually turn out to be poor ones also. Of course there are a few problems. You’ll be hard pressed to find any truthful tells from all the mud slung around and candidates don’t exactly run on their vices. Surely, when Nixon was campaigning, he didn’t run on the fact that he would be unconstitutional in his conduct.

What candidates do run on however are stances on major issues, which have sadly taken a backseat to less important subjects such as experience in recent campaigns. The keystone of good presidencies, each candidate’s platform, is a look into what they really believe in. With the recent economic crisis, many more voters are in fact looking up what a candidate is planning. So why not join them? Go to each nominee’s website, and see where decades in Congress get somebody, or where a little less leads others. You might be surprised.