US Presidential Race

[Enoch]

One other quick note: Having pointed the mistake that others have made in spelling "Giuliani," I feel I must point out the mistake I made in my earlier post: Bill Richardson is the governor of New Mexico, not Arizona. (I knew it was one of them big, empty desert states, dammit!)

[Sand]

Anyone who can improve our economy, education, military, and help the immigration problems, as well as providing security. Any help on the energy problem, as well as allowing for stem cell research and being friendly to the Christian right, is a big plus.

 

Being friendly to the Christian right is all well and good, just as long as it doesn't mean impeding on the rights on others or impede the progress of medical science. Those who aren't part of the Christian right shouldn't have to suffer from discrimination and have potential cures lost because of those who can't let go of traditional and outdated thinking.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Sand

[Gorgon]

Guliani. lols.

 

 

Out of your choices i'd say MCcain was the least horrid. I'm sure Obama means well, but you don't become president simply because you are the first black person to have a small chance to actually win.

[Sand]

True. You need to have charisma, leadership ability, and be knowledgable and aware of current world situations and politics. Out of all the candidates coming from the Senate, only he voted no on the war on Iraq. He had enough of a clue not to fall for the Bush Administration's ruse of falsifying intelligence reports.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Sand

[Dark_Raven]

LOLZ They all suck.

[taks]

uh, dark moth, hate to tell you but the economy in the US is rocking. apparently none of you guys were around when 10% unemployment (think carter) was the norm. heck, even the dow, an otherwise poor economic indicator, is at record levels again.

 

taks

[Sand]

Taks, is right. overall the economy is doing pretty well. Gas prices could be lower but it could be a whole lot worse than it is. Economically I have no problems with Bush. Its almost everything else.

[Dark Moth]

uh, dark moth, hate to tell you but the economy in the US is rocking. apparently none of you guys were around when 10% unemployment (think carter) was the norm. heck, even the dow, an otherwise poor economic indicator, is at record levels again.

 

taks

Shucks, that's good news, why do ya hate to tell me? But just because it's rocking doesn't mean it can't improve. But okay, how about a candidate who can maintain the good economy? And also help eliminate the debt, though that might not happen for some time.

[Atreides]

I'd like to hear more from Giuliani, McCain, Hillary and Obama on where they stand on a variety of international, domestic and economic issues before deciding.

 

I'm not sure where the impression that Hillary's a little extreme came from, but I think it's starting to stick.

[Walsingham]

I'm reading with interest, but I don't really know enough to comment.

[Sand]

Shucks, that's good news, why do ya hate to tell me? But just because it's rocking doesn't mean it can't improve. But okay, how about a candidate who can maintain the good economy? And also help eliminate the debt, though that might not happen for some time.

 

We can eliminate debt pretty quickly. We just need to focus on American needs internally over the needs of other countries. Remove all foreign aid to other countries and use that money and resources here at home, as it should be. The US Government should put the US Citizen and its own affiars first.

[Tale]

I don't really know enough to comment.

That doesn't stop us!

[Atreides]

From voting?

[Eddo36]

If you people knew what issues John Edwards support, 99% of you would be voting for him.

[Tale]

If you people knew what issues John Edwards support, 99% of you would be voting for him.

He supports stem cell research, cloning, environmentalism, and enchiladas?

[LostStraw]

I only care about the enchiladas

[taks]

Shucks, that's good news, why do ya hate to tell me? But just because it's rocking doesn't mean it can't improve.

everyone seems so set on chastising bush they seem to forget this is the one area he has shone brightly with.

 

But okay, how about a candidate who can maintain the good economy? And also help eliminate the debt, though that might not happen for some time.

actually, bush's economy has been an uphill ride since the bubble, which started well before he took office. i.e. he is maintaining the economy. yeah, gas prices are high, but not when you consider average inflation over the last 30 years or so (oil is a commodity, so it doesn't track normal inflation). the over-heated housing market has cooled in the regions in which is was over-heated, but everywhere else it is chugging along. and, not surprisingly, our budget deficit is actually getting smaller now... eliminating the debt, however, is next to impossible unless we maintain a power split (i.e. dem congress repub pres, vice versa). the problem with spending over bush's terms is not necessarily a bush problem, it's a one party control problem. clinton would have done the same had dems been in control then.

 

taks

[taks]

If you people knew what issues John Edwards support, 99% of you would be voting for him.

he's the most hard-core liberal in the group. not a chance.

 

taks

[Gorgon]

No one uses the word 'liberal' but a republican

[Oerwinde]

No one uses the word 'liberal' but a republican

 

Incorrect. Lots of people use the word liberal. Only Republicans use it as an insult. Not realizing that only other Republicans actually take offense at being labelled a liberal.

[Guard Dog]

No one uses the word 'liberal' but a republican

I'm not a republican and I use that word where applicable. There is nothing wrong with calling a duck a "duck". Especially if it quacks. Edwards is what we call a "Limousine Liberal". In other words he advocates the economy stifiling, freedom supressing liberal policies that he will never have to live by.

 

Hillary Clinton is a Liberal with a very big L. She was a disciple of Saul Alinsky when she was in college, and her Senate bid in 2002 and 2006 were endorsed by the US Communist Party (as was Al Gore's presidential bid in 2000, link here is you would like to see:US Communist Party. If she gets elected, God help us all.

 

Obama seems to be a big government democrat in the LBJ tradition. Not an appealing choice but better than the other two.

 

I'm with Enoch, if Bill Richardson were to run, he is the one dem I would vote for.

 

And I agree with Taks, ideally the House would have a strong dem majority and the Senate would have a strong repub majority then it does not matter who the President is. To quote Thomas Jefferson "The government that governs least governs best".

Edited March 14, 2007 by Guard Dog

[Gorgon]

The point is, it's a loaded word used to describe what you don't like, more than it is an actual recognisable political stance.

 

The US communist party is a joke obviously, their endorsement or lack of the same means nothing.

 

As for Hillary, she had some ambitious plans for health care and education while she was the lady macbeth behind the man, amd I applauded them.

 

Nevertheless, to me, her bid is only one step away from the nepotism of the Bushes. Only shows how deeply insular the political power base has become that in so enormous a country, the latest 4 presidents could wind up being very closely related indeed.

Edited March 14, 2007 by Gorgon

[mkreku]

Ok, everything I know about the candidates (except about Hillary) stems from me watching Jay Leno, so I really shouldn't even vote in a poll like this. But since less than 50% of the American citizens vote in the real elections, who cares, right?

 

Anyhow, Barak Obama is an eloquent speaker with a powerful charisma. He seemed highly intelligent (something which is a huge relief after seeing Bush trying to form complete sentences..) and to the point. He didn't seem like the type who would say anything to win votes. If that's a good thing or a bad thing is up for discussion; a leader has to be able to listen to what the people want too. It was they who chose him, after all. If he gets chosen, I think the US future politics would be an exciting affair to follow.

 

John Edwards was also very well spoken and kind of low key and humble. I personally liked that. I figure that he is the one who would suit my Swedish (left wing) tastes the most. He also mentioned his plan for US foreign politics and trust me, it sounded a hundred times better than anything that Bush has verbally vomited forth in the last few years. One thing that struck me was how connected with reality he seemed to be. He seemed very well informed about not only the US politics, but also other parts of the world, how they cooperate, how he wants the US to be more a part of the cooperation and such things. He didn't try to deny any mistakes that have been done (by the US governments of past) or try to "alter" history when asked difficult questions. I respect that a lot.

 

Those two are my favourites, even though it would be kind of neat if the US showed itself to be ready for a female president. I'm just not sure if Hillary is the best choice though..

[Guard Dog]

The US communist party is a joke obviously, their endorsement or lack of the same means nothing.

 

True enough they have no political pwer. But if they see something in Clinton and Gore they like, maybe we should take a look at why.

 

As for Hillary, she had some ambitious plans for health care and education while she was the lady macbeth behind the man, amd I applauded them.

 

Lady MacBeth is hardly complimentary, Gorgon. . I opposed those things she stood for. Strongly, for reason you already know.

 

Nevertheless, to me, her bid is only one step away from the nepotism of the Bushes. Only shows how deeply insular the political power base has become that in so enormous a country, the latest 4 presidents could wind up being very closely related indeed.

Oh man do I agree with you here. Since 1980 we have had either a Bush or a Clinton on the ballot or in office. Enough is enough already. Anyway..."Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow..."

[Sand]

While I do agree somewhat that the old Jefferson line but I would slightly amend it. "The government that governs least yet fulfills the needs of its citizenry governs best."