Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

The race for the White House in 08' has begun in earnest. Early frontrunners are Hillary Clinton for the Democrats, and Rudi Giuliani for the Republicans.

What I would like to see here is an open, honest, and civil discussion about the candidates. Have you settled on one yet? If so, why?

Suggesting such a loaded topic, I will go ahead and take the first plunge.

If I had to vote right now, which thank God I don't, it would probably be for Fred Thompson. He brings a "common sense' attitude to the Republican party that I think it's been missing for some time now. I don't agree with all of his stances, but he does have the most views that I fall in line with out of all candidates in all parties. Second to him would be Obama. He doesn't have first place with me because I haven't seem him talk about his issues as much as I've seen him posture and shoot off one liners. What he has said on a good deal of issues, I agree with quite a bit.

It is my sincere hope that the debates over the next months will really let us dig into every candidate from every party, and see what they are truly all about. I am hoping for some good moderators at the debates that will actually force the candidates to "just answer the question".

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

Protip to all of the elephant persuasion out there: Guiliani is not as great as he seems. While he did seem to be the only one with any leadership skills whatsoever after 9/11, his record before that was one of a lot of hypocrisy, a lot of censorship, and a lot of intolerance. A word to the wise.

Anyway. My first choice, ideally, would be Ally G (that's Gore). If there's no hope for him, as it seems, I pray for Obama. Experience shmexperience, everything I've read by and of him makes it seem like he's the most intelligent, thoughtful, and personable Democratic candidate in years, really exactly what we need right now.

God I hope the Dems don't nominate Hillary. I really, really, really dislike her, particularly her Lieberman-type stance on censorship and hysterical PROTECT THE CHILDREN attitudes. Jesus, I'm a liberal feminist who went to her fuggin' ALMA MATER and even I can't stand her; that can't be a good sign.

I'll vote for her if she gets nominated, though. God help me.

This post has been edited by L. Cully on 12th October 2007 13:14

--------------------

Some ghost of me might greet my son
the day he is delivered.


Eternal Sleep, Track 1-1: The Blue Planet

I disagree that Giuliani is really the front-runner for the Republicans. For a guy who has to get the vote of the religious right, he's awfully pro-choice... not to mention the sorry state of his personal life.

I'm considering registering as a Democrat so I can vote for Obama in the primaries and do my part to avoid the better part of the Clinton campaign. So is my father, who happens to be a staunch Republican.

I sincerely believe that all successful politicians are inherently and necessarily evil. Hearing someone talk about how ANY politician, liberal or conservative, is "honest" or a "good person" makes me giggle. It's simply not possible to be either and rise high enough in politics to be seriously considered for a presidential election.

I do have to admit that seeing Arthur Branch in the White House would be interesting.

I'm going to vote Libertarian. For one thing, I dislike the two party system. I feel that it presents voters with a false choice; to me, it's like getting to vote between green-yellow and yellow-green for Prettiest Crayon Color. For another, I agree with the Libertarian philosophy and I like what I've seen of their public representation, especially debates against the Republicrats. And, lastly, no Libertarian will ever be a successful politician, so it's possible that I'll be voting for someone who hasn't sold his soul for power and influence.

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

I guess I'll probably be voting for the Republican candidate. I am a conservative Christian, and I'd like to see someone get in there that has at least some of my values. I'm hoping the Republicans either have Thompson or Huckabee as their candidate, Thompson because from what I've seen of him he's practical (I just can't help agreeing with Hamedo here and there), and Huckabee because he's very conservative. If it's Mitt Romney, I really don't know.


--------------------

Status:
FF6 -- Finished! Yeah!
FF7 -- Finished (easily, and without KOtR)
FF8 -- End of Disc 3
Secret of Evermore--Leveling up for Salabog

"Go sit over there. Put your seatbelt on."--Squall

Quote (BDZ @ 12th October 2007 09:57)

I guess I'll probably be voting for the Republican candidate. I am a conservative Christian, and I'd like to see someone get in there that has at least some of my values. I'm hoping the Republicans either have Thompson or Huckabee as their candidate, Thompson because from what I've seen of him he's practical (I just can't help agreeing with Hamedo here and there), and Huckabee because he's very conservative. If it's Mitt Romney, I really don't know.

Mitt Romney's a Mormon. Look up what Mormons believe. I have a hard time believing that a conservative Christian who prefers to vote for people who share his values would even consider it.

And what if Rudy Giuliani is the Republican candidate? Which values of yours does he share? I'm a Christian, too, and the only thing we have in common is being pro-choice.

There's more to voting than just ticking off the party line. I don't agree with your values, but I'd suggest registering to vote in the Republican primary so you have a little more say in who goes up for president.

This post has been edited by karasuman on 12th October 2007 15:18

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

The conservative Christian vote will most likely go to Huckabee. The guy is a minister, and not in the "Jesse Jackson" sense, either. From what I have seen and heard, he preaches the Bible the way it was meant to be preached, and backs it up with his actions and views.

Thompson mirrors alot of those same values, but is not caught up as much in the theology. I believe Huckabee is the better person, but I believe Thompson is the more capable leader.

Something said earlier rings true to me whenever I think about elections. All candidates, no matter what flavor religion they subscribe to or what they have or have not done in the past, are crooked in some way. Yes, even Huckabee. An election, any election, is always a choice between the lesser of evils. This presidential election will be no different.

Hillary and Giuliani are the current front runners according to the polls, though in my area of the country (western NC) neither are wel lliked. Hillary is more or less despised, actually. I think of the two, Hillary has a good chance in the primaries while Rudi has an excellent shot in the general election, if he makes it that far. If Hillary and Rudi faced off in the general election, I think Rudi would win.

I follow suit with Karasuman in that I am disgusted with the entrenched two party system we are stuck with. Third party candidates are a throw away vote these days, and that strikes me as shameful. Currently, the only way to get into politics is to have alot of money and know people, and align yourself with one of the two "big wheels". I am at a loss as to how we could fix this, but I hate the way it stands currently.

Edit

I forgot that I wanted to respond to Kara's comment about Romney's mormon beliefs. Most Christians realize that we will never be ruled by a theocracy, so rather than focusing on a candidates' personal beliefs, we try to focus on their values. By and large, Romney shares the same values as mainstream Christianity. On the few that he deviates on, such as polygamy, we are smart enough to know that just because that is his belief doesn't mean that he will impose it on us all and push for a national law allowing multiple wives. I mean really, why would the modern man want more than one anyway? More nagging to take the trash out... do the dishes, ect...? No thanks. Plus, if I have a hard enough time keeping one woman happy, how will I keep three or four happy?!?

This post has been edited by Hamedo on 12th October 2007 15:45

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

Quote (Hamedo @ 12th October 2007 11:41)

On the few that he deviates on, such as polygamy, we are smart enough to know that just because that is his belief doesn't mean that he will impose it on us all and push for a national law allowing multiple wives. I mean really, why would the modern man want more than one anyway? More nagging to take the trash out... do the dishes, ect...? No thanks. Plus, if I have a hard enough time keeping one woman happy, how will I keep three or four happy?!?

I'm undecided as to a candidate, and as I said in the other thread yesterday, I'm unaffiliated and can't vote in a primary as of right now anyway. But I wanted to point out that most Mormons, including Romney as far as I am aware, no longer support polygamist beliefs. That's been an unfair stereotype for quite a while.

--------------------

"To create something great, you need the means to make a lot of really bad crap." - Kevin Kelly

Why aren't you shopping AmaCoN?

Quote (Rangers51 @ 12th October 2007 11:03)

Quote (Hamedo @ 12th October 2007 11:41)

On the few that he deviates on, such as polygamy, we are smart enough to know that just because that is his belief doesn't mean that he will impose it on us all and push for a national law allowing multiple wives.  I mean really, why would the modern man want more than one anyway?  More nagging to take the trash out... do the dishes, ect...?  No thanks.  Plus, if I have a hard enough time keeping one woman happy, how will I keep three or four happy?!? 

I'm undecided as to a candidate, and as I said in the other thread yesterday, I'm unaffiliated and can't vote in a primary as of right now anyway. But I wanted to point out that most Mormons, including Romney as far as I am aware, no longer support polygamist beliefs. That's been an unfair stereotype for quite a while.

My apologies. It was only meant as a bit of an extreme example. Carry it over to any other beliefs of the mormon sect that do not apply to mainstream Christianity, and the point is still made.

And Josh, I don't know why, but I have you pegged in my mind as a Giuliani guy.

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

Quote (Hamedo @ 12th October 2007 12:08)

And Josh, I don't know why, but I have you pegged in my mind as a Giuliani guy.

Nope. Even were I to vote Republican, which I don't see myself doing in the next election at this time, I doubt it would be Giuliani. I have massive respect for his work after 9/11, particularly as I saw some of the impact of it when I was there (albeit in the Bloomberg administration), I don't think he would translate well to being a solid President. I could be wrong, and we might yet see, but that's my gut feeling.

--------------------

"To create something great, you need the means to make a lot of really bad crap." - Kevin Kelly

Why aren't you shopping AmaCoN?

Personally, I find it's too early to tell. It's a shame Gingrich isn't running, he would've likely gotten my vote.

It seems to me to be too much of a mess right now to really find someone capable with all the bull that goes around, but all things considered, I really like Thompson's different approach to politics. Everything seems so cookie cutter that it's despicable, but he shows perhaps a glint of something different.

I could go into how I feel on their political stances on major issues, but it's really all been said already, and I rarely see the winners follow up on their promises that becomes the defining moments of their presidency lately.

On a side note, if Al Gore decided to run, he'd get my vote 100% no question.

This post has been edited by TheEvilEye on 12th October 2007 18:31

I've no idea who I'm gonna vote for next, but I somehow have a bad feeling it's gonna be like '04, where I don't really have a candidate that I want to vote for, but I voted for the lesser of two evils. That's right, I'm not proud, but I voted Bush .

John Kerry was a scary mother, and with the well-placed propaganda of Fahrenheit 9/11 right before the election, everybody and their dog was in anti-bush mode. I did not want to see Kerry in office, so I voted Bush, since I knew that everyone I knew wasn't.

Part of me doesn't want to see Hillary in office, so if it comes down to that, I may have to pull another "not voting for who I don't want" thing again. The only good thing that could come out Hillary being president is that it would make Bill the first First Man in the history of the united states.

But I'm not that up on everything going on, I don't even know who the vice-presidential candidates are running with these people.

Honestly, if it comes down to people I don't really care about either way, I may vote green, becuase my vote might actually matter then. There's no chance in hell that they could win, but getting 7% (i believe, it's been awhile since I've seen numbers) of the general vote allows them to enter into the public televised debates, where even if they are overly crazy about the environment, they can bring up issues that may at least sway viewers, if not bring up different positions for the major runners.

That, and Ralph Nader, with his kooky eye and everything, is very much a "real" person, not just a suit like all the other candidates.

--------------------

If internal struggles were as enjoyable and glamorous as the self conflicted wars within video game characters, we would all be statues, reveling in perpetual self war. -Me

Play me on Rock Band 2, GH-WT, or any other Xbox GH!
Xbox Gamertag-MeanJerry

Quote (leilong @ 12th October 2007 13:34)

But I'm not that up on everything going on, I don't even know who the vice-presidential candidates are running with these people.

They don't pick running mates until much later.

As far as the green party, and other 3rd parties, I wish we as a country could legitimately say that they have as good a shot as a rep or dem, but that couldn't be further from the truth. 3rd party candidates have the power to steal swing votes from one party or the other and influence the election quite heavily in that manner, but they don't have enough votes to get a person in office yet.

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

Ok, let's pretend I'm old enough to vote.

Obama. He doesn't have experience, he's a minority, and he's for the legalization of marijuana. These are some reasons people don't like him. They're also the reasons I DO like him.

Experience doesn't mean anything. George Washington hardly had political experience, and he's a hero, right? Obama's a brilliant man, and I really think he could make some good changes to this country.

I'm Jewish. I'm in a position to sympathize with him.

Also, he's for marijuana (at least, he was the last time I checked. I don't know if that's still on). I don't do marijuana, but I respect the people that do, and I don't think it should be illegal.

I have a friend who's a very conservative Republican. He wants Mitt Romney to win. We have interesting debates; Obama and Mitt are quite far from each other, politically. Personally, I can't stand Mitt Romney, nor can I stand Rudy Giuliani, but the one person I absolutely DO NOT want to win is Brownback. Fortunately he doesn't seem to be a big contender. That guy is just a prick.

--------------------

Squenix games completed:

FFIII
FFIV
FFVI
FFVII
FFIX
FFX
FF Tactics: Advance 2
Chrono Trigger
Dragon Quest 8
Dragon Quest 11
Super Mario RPG

I'm in Canada and not exposed to all the news coverage about this, but I was just wondering. Are there any Atheists in the running?


--------------------

I had an old signature. Now I've changed it.

I usually vote Republican (yes, I voted for Bush). Unless there's a real charismatic Democrat runnin', I think I'll stick with the Republicans.

--------------------

"Thought I was dead, eh? Not until I fulfill my dream!"
Seifer Almasy


"The most important part of the story is the ending."
Secret Window


"Peace is but a shadow of death."
Kuja

I was praying that Mark Warner would run, but it didn't happen - it looks like he's going to go after Virginia's soon-to-be-vacant Senate seat.

I don't dislike Hilary Clinton, but I think she has too much opposition from multiple angles to be very electable. I like Obama a lot, but I also question his electability because most of his voting base seems to be minorities and younger people (as in <30 years), both of which are demographics notorious for low voter turnout.

In a perfect world, Al Gore would run and have either Obama or Edwards as his running mate. Of course, that doesn't seem like much of a possibility right now. In the primary this year I'll probably vote for Obama, and there is a 95% chance that I'm voting Democrat in the 2008 election.

Edit

Evidently "<30" will result in a heart emoticon. Awesome.

This post has been edited by laszlow on 12th October 2007 21:09

--------------------

this is a blog mostly about comics and videogames
END SPOILER

Quote (Elena99 @ 12th October 2007 15:03)

I'm in Canada and not exposed to all the news coverage about this, but I was just wondering. Are there any Atheists in the running?

Nope. That would be political suicide.

Of course, I'm referring to avowed atheists. God only knows what these people really believe.

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

If you're an Atheist and running for office, it better only be behind closed doors. Religion is factor #1 among the voting masses, and therefore you wouldn't have a chance. To even get 1% of the vote (because even fellow Atheists would rather vote for someone that is going to factor into the political race).


Myself, at this juncture I am going to vote Obama. I know it's just standard mudslinging, but I think all the anti-Obama hate out there is a bit overblown and unjustified. The guy is an actual leader, and a lot more honest and open about his life than most people. What's sad is how far McCain has fallen. I loved him in 2000, he actually spoke out against corruption and didn't just pander to the Right.

Now? He's pathetic. And out of the race because of it. Not only was he shaking the hand of Jerry Falwell, a man he spoke out against 8 years before (clearly only to pander to the Conservative Christian base). But his abortion stance? Hilarious. He was asked what his stance was on abortion to which he replied:

"I'm not sure right now, I'm going to have to get my secretary to check on it". In other words, "I have to figure out which stances are the best for pandering". I hate him now.


Now Hillary? Can someone tell me...honestly....where are these people coming from that support her? Not only is she repulsive in everything politics to me, but she's the definition of "Cold Fish" on the Love-O-Meter. I don't know anyone, not a single soul, that supports Hillary. No one. I don't even know any College Democrats at my college that support her.

I mean, I can't for the life of me figure out how she is leading in the polls, when I haven't talked to anyone anywhere that doesn't despise her, let alone support her. It's perplexing...

Mitt's not so bad. Not a big fan of Thompson. Giulliani is a terrible man.

--------------------

The clouds ran away, opened up the sky
And one by one I watched every constellation die
And there I was frozen, standing in my backyard
Face to face, eye to eye, staring at the last star
I should've known, walked all the way home
To find that she wasn't here, I'm still all alone

-Atmosphere "Always Coming Back Home to You"

Quote

If Hillary and Rudi faced off in the general election

Worst. Nightmare.

Quote

On a side note, if Al Gore decided to run, he'd get my vote 100% no question.

God, I wish the Al Gore of the last 4 years had been the Al Gore running in 2000. He would have won hands down. Gore raced so hard to the middle in 2000 it was hard to tell his and Bush's stances apart. Now I even know Republican's who wish Gore was in office (which they definitely weren't saying 4 years ago.)

Quote

I may vote green, becuase my vote might actually matter then.

I was so repulsed by Gore in 2000 that I voted for Nader. I have the liberty to do that in the Democratic stronghold of Illinois, but I have mixed feelings about it now (especially since Gore has apparently grown a pair recently.)

Quote

Also, he's for marijuana (at least, he was the last time I checked. I don't know if that's still on).

Don't expect him to back that position for the next two years. Or even after that, as long as he either is President or has Presidential ambitions. We're just too far off from legalization for so many reasons. (I'm for legalization of marijuana, but not harder drugs.)

Quote

What's sad is how far McCain has fallen.

Right on. It was at the point for me in 2000 that I was seriously considering voting McCain if it had come to Gore vs. McCain. I guess his people told him he needed to get the religious conservative votes that Bush was getting in order to have a chance. I'm half rooting for him in the Republican race, because I think if he does somehow win the primary, he'll come to his senses and turn back into the reasonable man we saw in 2000. (If you don't already, watch him on the Daily Show. He sounds very much like a man not entirely convinced and a little embarassed of the stance he's taking.)

As I said in the other thread, I'm both voting and campaigning for Obama. Being from Illinois, I've had an easier time following his career and hearing his viewpoints on issues. He's been pandering a little to the middle since the presidential run has started, so I'm hoping that if he can beat Hillary, (like Tidu said, who is supporting Hillary right now?) we'll get to see the real Obama, a man with solid values that wants to get things accomplished, but in a diplomatic way. He has a stance on issues but is willing to compromise to get things done. I hope the people that are undecided get to hear him speak before the primary.

Hamedo-It's interesting you picked Thompson among the Republicans. Other than McCain coming to his senses, I think Thompson is the Republican I think would do the best job. There's no Republican I really support this time around, but I feel like Thompson is the one most likely to be a rational leader, and the one least likely to get us stuck in Iran in 5 years.

--------------------

Hip-Hop QOTW:

"Yeah, where I'ma start it at, look I'ma part of that
Downtown Philly where it's realer than a heart attack
It wasn't really that ill until the start of crack
Now it's a body caught every night on the Almanac"

"Game Theory"
The Roots

Quote (karasuman @ 12th October 2007 10:17)

Quote (BDZ @ 12th October 2007 09:57)

I guess I'll probably be voting for the Republican candidate. I am a conservative Christian, and I'd like to see someone get in there that has at least some of my values. I'm hoping the Republicans either have Thompson or Huckabee as their candidate, Thompson because from what I've seen of him he's practical (I just can't help agreeing with Hamedo here and there), and Huckabee because he's very conservative. If it's Mitt Romney, I really don't know.

Mitt Romney's a Mormon. Look up what Mormons believe. I have a hard time believing that a conservative Christian who prefers to vote for people who share his values would even consider it.

And what if Rudy Giuliani is the Republican candidate? Which values of yours does he share? I'm a Christian, too, and the only thing we have in common is being pro-choice.

There's more to voting than just ticking off the party line. I don't agree with your values, but I'd suggest registering to vote in the Republican primary so you have a little more say in who goes up for president.

Holy junk. What I meant by "I really don't know" is "If it comes down to Romney vs. The Average Frontrunner Democrat, I just may have to vote for Romney, dang it." I know full well what Mormons believe but I am definitely pro-life and against big government and I don't want to throw away my vote on a third party candidate.

As far as Rudy Giuliani goes he sickens me too, that's why I am hoping for Thompson or Huckabee. And I just might have to take your advice and vote in the Republican primary.

This post has been edited by BDZ on 13th October 2007 03:39

--------------------

Status:
FF6 -- Finished! Yeah!
FF7 -- Finished (easily, and without KOtR)
FF8 -- End of Disc 3
Secret of Evermore--Leveling up for Salabog

"Go sit over there. Put your seatbelt on."--Squall

I follow politics with a strangely cynical passion and I don't really like anyone in particular. Sometimes I wish I could vote for someone who was awesome, like Lincoln, FDR, Lyndon Johnson, Nixon...but no. My thoughts:

Rudy is obsessed with 9/11 and I'll admit he did probably the best job on that day compared to other people, but the gulf between mayor who did a good job on one terrible day and possibly president is vast. Besides, conservative Christian leaders have threatened to form a third party if he gets the nomination, so It's doubtful he can garner enough support in the end run. Lastly, he's hiring a lot of neocons in his campaign and I sharply disagree. Pass.

Romney makes John Kerry look consistent. Romney said in 94(?) that he'd be better for gay rights then Ted Kennedy and ran as a pro-choice for Governor. Add the fact that he's from a moderately controversial and misunderstood religious minority (Mormonism) and I severely doubt he'd be to win. All the Democrats would have to do is show clips of his debate with Ted Kennedy from 94 when he ran for the senate. Pass.

McCain doesn't talk about reform anymore and not so maverick anymore, so now he's old news. Pass.

Fred Thompson? I love law & order, but I like McCoy and even Schiff more then Branch. Besides, I don't like actor Presidents personally. Pass.

Obama is inexperienced. At least Edwards in 04 had a full Senate term. He talks a good game and he's got hope, but I dunno if America as a whole is ready for a black president. Maybe, but likely pass.

Clinton? HAHAHA! She loves money too much. I'd rather vote for libertarians, and I have no love for them. Sadly she probably has the best chance of winning. Definite pass.

Edwards? White male protestant, talks a good game, but no proof. No real strong feelings. Meh.

To be honest, I'm looking at the no-names. Joe Biden (D) has like 30 years experience and has tons of foreign policy experience, plus he's hilarious. Dennis Kuchinich (D) is probably the candidate I could get behind the most in terms of policies, but is too short to be president. Bill Richardson (D) is Hispanic, has a good variety of experience and might grab Hispanic voter's support. I'd vote for them, but none have a shot.

To be honest, most likely Clinton and Romney/Guliani will get the nomiations. In that case, I'll take a stand (ie throw away my vote) and vote for a third party. Most likely Nader, if my accursed state will let him on the ballot. Sigh.

This post has been edited by Kylerocks on 13th October 2007 13:04

--------------------

Really Random Quote of the Day: "Short of changing human nature, therefore, the only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war." - Richard M. Nixon

So if you're done reading this, you know I have nothing to say and you've wasted your time. Thank you come again.

Quote (Kylerocks @ 12th October 2007 23:01)

I dunno if America as a whole is ready for a black president.

You made a lot of good points about the candidates. That wasn't one of 'em.

Of everyone so far, I'm prolly gonna go Obama. If nothing else, he knows how to speak without coming off as a monumental jackass, which I've yet to see from anyone else in the run. But that's just a perk, the real motivation here is far more serious.

I want one thing and one thing only out of the next president: Get us the f^ck outta Iraq. Right off the bat, that eliminates all of the republicans leaving me with the dems.

Obama's inexperience is the risk, I'll admit that. He'll either be reckless or weak. I get that it's a crap shoot. But so far, he's the only candidate I've heard who's been able to fake sincerity, which if nothing else shows he's not a complete idiot.

--------------------

Arts

Farts

Twarts

Quote (Kylerocks @ 13th October 2007 01:01)

Most likely Nader, if my accursed state will let him on the ballot. Sigh.

You can vote for Nader even if he's not on the ballot. You know his name, right?

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

I'm voting Nader because he's the only trustworthy candidate. ever. Seriously check his Wikipedia under personal life. It's like: he has a small fortune from good investments, and he donates a lot to his own umbrella organizations.

That documentary about him was awesome, by the way.

Edit

Besides that, don't you just love that evil eye thing he's got going on? It's so awesome.

This post has been edited by MogMaster on 13th October 2007 10:19

--------------------

If you've been mod-o-fied,
It's an illusion, and you're in-between.
Don't you be tarot-fied,
It's just alot of nothing, so what can it mean?
~Frank Zappa

Sins exist only for people who are on the Way or approaching the Way

Quote (karasuman @ 12th October 2007 23:21)

Quote (Kylerocks @ 13th October 2007 01:01)

Most likely Nader, if my accursed state will let him on the ballot. Sigh.

You can vote for Nader even if he's not on the ballot. You know his name, right?

True, but if I recall...your vote doesn't count, they're just going to lump that serious vote with the 'Bugs Bunny' or 'Micky Mouse' votes. Besides, *I* may vote for him because I'm aware of him and respect him. But other people who are don't like the other two candidates would just pinch their nose and vote for one of those two, rather then vote for an alternative to the dastardly two party system.

Narratorway, keep in mind that only Bill Richardson (and maybe Dennis Kuchinich) are the only ones that plan on getting troops outta Iraq in any real time. Most other democrats are for 'phased withdrawals' or permanent bases.

Also, the 'America's not ready for a black president' was a bit harsh of me. But there is NO precedent of a black candidate for president. There's a differnce between saying you'd support a black president and voting for one unfortunately. At least with a woman was nominated for VP in 84. There hasn't been much change over the last 44 presidents, the main different president was Kennedy and his Catholicism and you can say he only got that because Nixon wasn't attractive or the rumored 'dead people voting in Chicago.' I'm not saying it's impossible for Obama to be president, but he's gonna have an uphill battle and going to have to prove himself more then usual.

--------------------

Really Random Quote of the Day: "Short of changing human nature, therefore, the only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war." - Richard M. Nixon

So if you're done reading this, you know I have nothing to say and you've wasted your time. Thank you come again.

Quote (MogMaster @ 13th October 2007 04:17)

I'm voting Nader because he's the only trustworthy candidate. ever. Seriously check his Wikipedia under personal life. It's like: he has a small fortune from good investments, and he donates a lot to his own umbrella organizations.

That documentary about him was awesome, by the way.

Edit

Besides that, don't you just love that evil eye thing he's got going on? It's so awesome.

I like the idea of voting for Nader, but I have no political grounds to base that on. Other than the fact that I have many friends that are all, "Yay Nader!" I base my opinnion of him on personality, not policy.

I have to admit though, the night Nader went on The Daily Show was one of the best guests I've seen. The fact that he was able to relax, smile, and give & take a joke so well (I think) says volumes for his character.

--------------------

If internal struggles were as enjoyable and glamorous as the self conflicted wars within video game characters, we would all be statues, reveling in perpetual self war. -Me

Play me on Rock Band 2, GH-WT, or any other Xbox GH!
Xbox Gamertag-MeanJerry

Why has no one mentioned Ron Paul?

didn't really expect this one to get started so soon. but then again, the entire process is starting too soon this year.

BTW, i am too young to vote, but i can't help but join in.

i'm on the anyone but hillary bandwagon. i also doubt that a follower of islam can win. as a catholic, i wouldn't vote for guliani. i would have to go with Fred Thompson. im not a big fan of actors, but, as already mentioned, he brings a common sense attitude to the entire race that is needed. plus, come on, he looks like a guy who could be president.

--------------------

Currently Playing : Final Fantasy V
Most Recently Beat : Elder Scrolls: Skyrim
Favorite Game : Final Fantasy X

The newest CoNcast is up! Have a listen!

Quote (Kylerocks @ 13th October 2007 07:57)

Quote (karasuman @ 12th October 2007 23:21)

Quote (Kylerocks @ 13th October 2007 01:01)

Most likely Nader, if my accursed state will let him on the ballot. Sigh.

You can vote for Nader even if he's not on the ballot. You know his name, right?

True, but if I recall...your vote doesn't count, they're just going to lump that serious vote with the 'Bugs Bunny' or 'Micky Mouse' votes. Besides, *I* may vote for him because I'm aware of him and respect him. But other people who are don't like the other two candidates would just pinch their nose and vote for one of those two, rather then vote for an alternative to the dastardly two party system.

That's pretty much true regardless of whether he makes it onto the ballot. Your mindset of "eh, no point in a write-in candidate" is the same as "eh, no point in a third-party candidate." It's the same logic, and it's just as damaging to the political process because it guarantees that only the Republicrats have any chance of winning.

Write-in candidates have done well before in other elections. Maybe not presidential, sure... but if you're so sure that voting your conscience is throwing away your vote because so many other people are going to vote the party line, why do you think your vote is worth anything in the first place? There are so many votes being cast that, really, what difference does yours make?

If you still think it makes a difference, then you should realize that voting your conscience makes no less of an impact than voting for one of the Republicrats does.

Besides, third party candidates are the ones who actually need the vote percentage. It affects them for future elections.

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

Quote (karasuman @ 13th October 2007 11:52)

That's pretty much true regardless of whether he makes it onto the ballot.  Your mindset of "eh, no point in a write-in candidate" is the same as "eh, no point in a third-party candidate."  It's the same logic, and it's just as damaging to the political process because it guarantees that only the Republicrats have any chance of winning.

Well, the Repbulicrats are going to win no matter what. Third Party candidates don't have a shot in hell. That vote may be a waste, but the candidate isn't a waste, the party isn't. A third parties isn't going to be made because we elected a president, it's gonna start in local elections and seep it's way naturally into Congress with any luck. The Presidential run is just to scare and shake up the system.

A lot of change has come about from third party presidential candidates, despite none of them winning. Abolitionism, women's suffrage, labor rights and probably a lot of things more that I have forgotten have started from third party candiates. Hell, if I recall correctly, the idea of Social security was a plank on one of Eugene Debs' (Socialist) campaigns, only twenty or so years later did the democrats adopt and cherish it. Granted, sometimes it works against you (George Wallace in 68 and the advent of the 'Southern Strategy'.)

You could point to 2000 and 'Nader stealing Gore's victory' as a bad thing necessarily. But admittedly, I have read 'Crashing the Party' Ralph Nader's account on the election and I have to say to say that's not true. People supported Nader because they were dissatisfied with both canidates, but instead the democrats adopting some of Nader's policies to take the fire out of him and earn their votes, they stuck to Clinton's triangulation and kept Nader out. (Triangulation being a term where 't involves adopting for oneself some of the ideas of one's political opponent. The logic behind it is that it not only takes good ideas away from your opponent, but that it insulates you from attacks on that particular issue.') Effectively just furthering the blur between the two parties.

A vote for a third party may not count because the candidate will not win, but the goal isn't to elect that candidate necessarily, but to shake up the establishment enough to consider the third party candidate a threat. Although the two parties seem to fix the game and set up stupid rules for getting into the debates and on the ballots, because John Anderson ('80) and Ross Perot ('92 and '96) got on the debates and shook things up. Perot in 92 made the debates exciting and at times polled first with 29%, although he ended up with 18%. In 96 he only got 8% and never had the lead because partly because he didn't get in the debates.

I've rambled enough, I've got dishes to do.

--------------------

Really Random Quote of the Day: "Short of changing human nature, therefore, the only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war." - Richard M. Nixon

So if you're done reading this, you know I have nothing to say and you've wasted your time. Thank you come again.