2008 Candidates. What to do?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Steerpike, Dec 31, 2007.

  1. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182
    Right now I'm leaning toward Obama.

    CLINTON - I don't trust her. I think her ambition is getting the job itself and doesn't go much beyond that. I think she's corrupt and will say or do whatever necessary to try and win. She doesn't appear to me to have any principles. To top it off, I don't want a quarter-century of one of the same two families in the White House.

    EDWARDS - Combination televangelist and snake-oil salesman. I've known people like this guy and wouldn't trust him further than I could throw a pickup truck. He's also engaged in class divisiveness, which I don't think is good for the country (and he's one of these rich guys he keeps complaining about).

    So that leaves me with Obama unless I want to consider GOP candidates. I've never voted GOP for national office. I "might" be willing to consider Guilani...

    ROMNEY - GOP version of Edwards. Slick. Vaciliates with the wind. Can't trust the guy.

    GUILIANI - Can do one thing the GOP desperately need to do in 2008, which is appeal to independent voters. Guiliani might be the only GOP candidate who can win the general election.

    MCCAIN - Tenative "no," although I haven't entirely ruled him out.

    HUCKABEE - No way I would ever vote for this guy. He's a religious nut and not what we need in the White House.

    Back to Obama - not much experience, but I don't think that's as big a deal as some. In this day and age particularly, Presidents do not act alone. They are surrounded by experts. The only thing that worries me about Obama are the experts he might pick.

    Also, to the extent Obama might go a little too far afield, remember that he may not be working with a cooperative Congress for his entire term. Right now the only people with approval ratings lower than Bush are the Dems in Congress who haven't done jack since they were elected and have been more or less led by the nose by the Bush administration. People aren't happy about it, although I don't know if they're unhappy enough to put the GOP back in.

    Supreme Court is the only thing that would overly concern me about Obama and a Dem congress. I like to see balance on the court, first of all, and secondly I like to see more moderate people there. I don't think the judiciary is typically a good place to make radical social change, so I wouldn't want to see people who are extremely left-wing take seats on the court.

    There's always a third party too I suppose.

    What about the rest of you?
     
  2. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    I'm looking at Obama too. I've decided to throw my vote with Ron Paul if Obama doesn't get the nomination. I'd give Bill Clinton a third term if I could but, since that is out of the picture, I'm not willing to swallow a substitute that isn't even half as tempting. Hillary voted to go to war with Iraq and that, for me, is a real albatross around her neck.

    I like Rudy insomuch that he is clearly as human as the rest of us. I remember him from 9/11 despite it seeming to be the only arrow in his quiver sometimes. I like that he is socially liberal.


    I would not vote for Romney or Huckabee. I wish we could get a nominee who is not trying to wear their dogma on their sleeve like a newspaper ad. the irony of Romney's denominational mormonism under the umbrella of "christianity" kills me and was the type of thing I was predicting back in 04. Mccain became a worthless candidate. I was considering him after 04 because he seemed to criticisethe divisive politiking... But the whole "bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb iran" thing and his laughable desperate lunge toward Joe Lieberman is not only transparent as hell but sinks him for me.



    I really think that Obama could bring new ideas into the White House instead of perpetuating the baby boomer drama of the 20th century. I'm ready for a different American direction.
     
  3. JimH52
    Offline

    JimH52 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    19,207
    Thanks Received:
    3,090
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    US
    Ratings:
    +8,167
    Hillary voted to go to war because the books were cooked. DICK and his mindless buddy gw were able to stack falsehoods so high that fear played into the hands of the neocons. Hillary is realistic about the issues and has the background. Obama has yet to finish his first term in Congress and, besides being buddy with Oprah, hasn't a clue.

    Rudy would keep us in a continual war if he is elected. Hillary will be the Dem candidate but I have no idea who is emerging from the GOP ranks. I would like to see McCain or Thompson but that looks like a reach.
     
  4. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    Im not going to make any excuse for hillary that I don't extend to every other politican that voted to go to war over bullshit. if they cannot sniff it out or have the backbone to to fend off the group think then fuck em. Lets set an example of retribution for unexceptable behaviour.

    Obama is a fresh start. He's not an autistic gimp just because he hasn't been in congress long enough to start collecting skeletons. Hell, it doesn't take a career politician to run this joint.
     
  5. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    Michael Bloomberg joining the race, which is the subject of much speculation right now, would change the equation radically. I'm just concerned it will change it for the benefit of the repubs. Of course, Paul running a third party candidacy would mess them up equally.

    Interesting race.
     
  6. JimH52
    Offline

    JimH52 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    19,207
    Thanks Received:
    3,090
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    US
    Ratings:
    +8,167
    Jillian, isn't Boomberg a Democrat turned Republican? I am not sure he will do anything for the Repubs. But the third party candidate might be the key.
    Perot did Bush Sr. in against Clinton and I will always maintain that Nader did Gore in...(or was it Kerry.)

    This race is getting more and more interesting!
     

Share This Page