Printable View
Yes, it is a bit early, but with the elections just being completed, and 2008 elections suddenly abuzz as a result of them, who would you like to see run for and win the White House in 2008
Not what Party, but what Person, do you believe would make a great next President??
Michael Badnarik (Hope he runs again, Ill vote for him again)
Thanks for your reply
Honestly.. ME.. At this point I am the only person I trust who honsetly wants to cut the budget and get rid of pork and get rid of all those wastfull government agencies, and get the ones that actually do GOOD to work better. I'm the only one I trust that trully wants real tax reform (www.fairtax.org), That doesn't think government has any authority in the constitution to force people into a government retirement plan that is totally illegal if you tried to set it up yourself (Social security in current form), and I'm the only one i trust that thinks the best government is the one that is out of the way, has very little power.
So how do I form that exploratory committee ?
I wouldn't be the first kinky republican fisical tight wad to be in the white house. :)
Tazzinnc,
thanks for your reply, a kinky repbilican is fine, as Jay Leno said "A Kinky one is fine as I have been unable to frind a Stright Republican in years" thisi s his view not mine
Right now I'm wondering about who'll make the best candidate.
Hmmm... Obama, perhaps? He's definitely likeable enough(in my opinion), and I think the democrats need someone who can clearly define what their party stands for.
I also really like John Edwards, and would love for him to at least try for the candidacy, but that isn't likely to happen. (Did anyone see him on the Daily Show? Did he mention that at all?)
Hillary... No comment.
On the republican side, if I had to vote for one it would be Rudy Giuliani, as he seems progressive enough socially and moderate enough for everything else. He could very well make a damn fine president--but he doesn't have a chance in hell.
McCain... I used to respect him a good deal, but the whole torture compromise undermined all that in an instant. Totally untrustworthy, in my opinion.
Now please allow me to ask a question(s) of my own. Why the hell are we talking about this two years before the election? I mean, the Dems are taking congress in January, but all I see when I watch the news is endless speculation about '08, and the occasional story on Iraq. What ever happened to health care and social security? The No Child Left a Dime Act is set to expire soon, is it not?
My apologies if I'm ranting(which I most certainly am), but I can only handle so much before I snap:32: . This thread seemed an appropriate venting place.
-Sahaqiel
Sahaqiel,
The reason I made the post is even thou the mid terms just finished, there has been alot of Buzz on all the news shows already about who would run on each side in 2008, that was the only reason, plus the geneneral election is 1 1/2 years off and this is America,
Hey they are already talking about who will host the 2016 Olympics LOL!! and that is 10 years off
if the demos have both houses i'd have to say a Rep. in the big chair.
make it harder and balanced to get something done.
Oops... Sorry, mkemse, I didn't mean to sound like a I was snapping at you. Nah, I was snapping at the system. Now that I think about it, this thread's not all that uncalled for. Instead of repetitive "will s/he run" speculations you're asking for personal opinion. My bad.
So, to acually answer the intial question, I personally would like to see Al Gore take the presidency. He's brilliant, charismatic(now that he no longer acts like he's got a stick up his ass), and puts forth new ideas for relevant causes(something we sorely need in Washington).
-Sahaqiel
Sahaqiel,
I did not precieve your repy as "screaming at me" intersstingly enough, I have talked to alot of people who do not want the Dem in charge, I told them, "Hey, look at the election, if you did not want them in charge you should have voted for the other party"
I would love to see Obama run and win, the issue here is whether this country is ready for an African American President, regardless of his, style, class, ect ect as far as Hillary goes, no comment one way or the other
thanks again for your reply to this post
:)
Also after 6 1/2 years, this country is in desprite need of checks and balances in Washington, so NO President has a blank check to do as he wishes, he is and always will be accoutable to the people nothis party, and whaen that stops changes, be they good or bad must be made, you can not have a Democracy where 1 party runs everything and rubber stamps all issues and bills
I do disagree with you, mkemse....what you stated is the Preisdent BUsh has had a 'free reign' and has never been accountable...that simply is not true...most, if not all, representives and senators willingly endorsed his measures as necessary with congressional oversight at all times....in this republic (it is not a democracy) there are ALWAYS checks and balances...remember, the President is in charge primarly of foreign policy, congress with domestic....and there has not been any evidence of llegel "rubberstamping"..
FYI, I am in the district that Rep. Ney held....he lied and betrayed the people here across the board...and the Republican members fryed him, and he was held accountable....(personally I hope he is made 'queen' of the prison)...will the democrats do the same to their members? or will they do what they historically do, attempt to sweep it under the rug when a member does wrong and breaks the oath of office?
FYI 2...this year I lost a hero of mine...Randy (Duke) Cunningham....he forgot why he was there, and his oath to us all....
All I meant is that with the House And Senate controled by Repbulicans, Bush has had NO problem getting his agenda pushed through, The Same exact thing happened when the Dem where in chargein years back
My point is that who ever is Presient, we need checks and balance in Congress, if we have a Democrtaic President, we need a Repbulican congress and visa vera
There as many bad Dems as Republicans do not get me wrong
Rubber Stamping no, but everything Bush ahs asked for has brezzed through the Senate as has happened with Democrats in office it has always been and will always be a 2 way street
One person I would like to see run for President but he would never do it is Colin Powel
I also think Colin Powell is a good man, but I just don't think he wants the job.
As far as the Republicans are concerned I think their two strongest candidates are McCain and Gulliani.
On the Democrat side Hilary Clinton seems to be the obvious front runner, but she has a long way to go.
The other person who I'm really impressed with is Obama. He seems to be very bright and he has a rather engaging personality.
Dungenmaster6,
Thanks for you reply and insight
Powel would never run, I agree with you
I would like to see John Edwards or Barak Obama. Be great if the two ran on the same ticket as Prez and Vice Prez. If the two were running for president, I don't know which one I would vote for. I would have to hear more from them.
I agree, An Edwards/ Obama ticket would be strong.
It would be, but with John Edwards Wife dealing with Breast Cancer how likely is it he will run, and does Obamam have enough "seasoning" to run andwin, I do not believe he would run just to run and are we rdy for either Female President or an African American President, I am NOT saying either yes or no, just posing a question??
I aso believe what happens in the next 2 years with Democratic Control will determine who runs and can they win, now is NOT the time for Hilary, if she runs there is a very good likely hood the Repblicans will retain control of the White House
I agree, I have some reservations about Hilary myself. It's difficult sometimes to pin her down as to what she stands for. She's doing a smart thing though, positioning herself as a moderate, since most elections are determined by middle-of-the-roaders and independents.
I believe Edwards' wife's cancer is either in remission or cured, and he is already running for president.
As for Mr Obama, I'm even more impressed with him everytime I hear him talk. He's a smart man with an engaging personality.
True, but is this country ready for an African-American President
For once,just once I would like to see someone elected who is qualified and strong and have the American electorate decide on a President in 2008 based on the Candidate abilities, and let's for once focus on issues and not on whehter the Prospectuve Candidate is Female, Africcan American ect
If the person can get the job done and is qualified, let's elect a President,based on their abilities and not on their Gender, Race ect
We also need to elect by popular vote and get reid of the elctoral college, to out dated and unless
Personally I think it needs to be a Republican which one well that is a good question. McCain lost a lot of respect of mine for his compromises and such. They (GOP) need to look for a strong governors because it seems like governors usually make decent presidents. Do not flame me about Bush he is just doing what he thoughts was right and best for the nations.
On the Dem side I do not want Hillary she had her 8 years...lol Obama he is still too junior in Wahington though he does make some valid points and is a very good public speaker. Al Gore no way still a bozo even though he is trying to "remake" himself. Kerry no way just an idiot and will never live down the I voted for it then did not vote waffle.
slaveneedledick,
thanks for your reply and comments
After the Mid Term Landslide in Novemember, the Repblicans may have a very difficult time fielding anyone Americans will vote for
And even if as some have put it, the Democrats did not win, the Republicans lost, if this is true that is more the reason why the Republicans may have a hard time winning again in 2008, just a thought an opion, I appriciate yours
I am from Illinois, and for the first time in almost 30 years ever state office in now Democratic, very rarely happens but on Nov 7, Americans made their voices heard, depending on what happens the next 2 years, the Republicans could find themselves rebuilding before they win the White House again, the Democrats wen through that a few years back as well,
Like many here I see advantages to a divided Government. Dems. holding the purse strings in congress and a Republican executive to hold them in check.or the other way around it doesn't matter to me. Gridlock can be a beautiful thing when it comes to making sure the government doesn't do too much harm, or too much of anything for that matter.
All that aside The Republicans have a few problems. The most prominent folk (highest name recognition) are Powel who won't run, McCain who is a senator(rarely do we draw chief executives from the Senate pool Kennedy was the last I believe) and worse yet a campaign would reveal that he's a bit of a kook when you scratch away at his surface. Rudy is an executive, but a Northeast Liberal (Capital L) with very progressive social leanings. That might help in a general election but it would drive the republican base away and he'd never make it through their primary.
Which brings us to the second tier, consider if you would Mitt Romney, former Massachusetts Governor,
And able to win two elections in the bluest of blue states but a devote Mormon and just staunch enough to beat out Rudy in a toe to toe for the heart and soul of the republican base. However he is from the Nor East and has learned to play well with Dems. Could be a match made in..Ummm… Washington?
I can't tell you a specific person, but I sure would like to see America elect a President based on his intelligence rather than his "likeability". Hopefully, George W. has proven that just because you could imagine enjoying spending the evening with a guy does not make him good Presidential material. As far as Obama and Hillary go, I don't think an ethnic minority or a woman can get elected unless that person is a republican.
fantassy
*runs around with a 'CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT' sign*
Not sure they would need to be a Republican, but they would need to have executive experience. That is be elected Governor of a State and preferably re-elected once or twice. Obama might work his way toward that, he's young. Hillary is too polarizing to pull that off even in NY and she doesn't have the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by fantassy
And yeah I know GW was a Gov and look how that worked out, Still it's usually either Govs or VPs that get the nod in this country and ain't nobody electing Chenney (his daughter's gay ya know)
Politics blah our system is broken when the founding fathers made this great country of ours they did not intend for there to be career polititions.It has seriously become a joke no matter which side wins we all loose.When was the last time you were happy with our govrenment?For me iot was the 8 years Regan was president.I will not go into the reasons why but like all of them he had his strong points and his weak.The system is corrupt the rich get their wealth stolen from them every single one of us who works hard to try to afford the better things in life get robbed by them.Take a good look around at your community and see your tax dollars at work.I am waiting for the next revolution the question is how many will join us that are totally unsatisfied with our current govrenment.
It may be corrupt, but it has also shown overtime that a "Democracy" like ours, with FREE election that work, you may not like the out come but you have a choice as to who you want to vote for and can vote a such with uot fear of going to jail
The rich get richer the poor get poorer
Republicans will always be the party of Big Business, the Democrats of the working person, not system is perfect, but ours despite it problems works better then most
Ok my two cents since I have been nothing but researching canidates.
I would love to see a Libertarian president. Micheal Badernik would be great I supported him in the last election unfortuntly I think as of right now the libertarians don't have much chance. I think if they laid off a little on their support of legalizing pot it might help them be taken more seriously. I also think that the fairtax is very in line with their beliefs and would give them a lot of popular support. I can tell you as a college student they have astounding numbers of college students. I just don't think they have big enough following yet. Sadly :(
Now lets stay in lala land for a minuite. Bill Richardson is a governer from New Mexico and I believe he is the strongest canidate running and would make a wonderful president. The biggest thing he has going for him is 15 years experince as a diplomat which would be a great help in reparing our forgien relations. He however probably will not get the democratic nomination unless God intervens.
Now the person I think has the best chance of getting his partys nomination and possiably winning that I would support would be Rudy. Esp if he ends up running agianest Hilary. He is very liberal for a republican and I think would attract a lot of swing votes. I think the repblicans if they are smart will relaize that they are SCREWED and support him. He's a very good comprimise between the two parties, has a lot of popular support, and has proven himself a leader.
As for my opinons on Hilary and MaCain I will keep them to myself for they are not fit for a public foruam. I will say though that is anyone is really into talk radio that MaCain reminds me a lot of a talk show host named Micheal Savage. Take that as you will.
At the moment I have no personal favorit.
They all make compromises on their principles, and quite honestly, that is a far far cry from the politicans who created this country. Though that failure is ours primarily because we as a whole accepted those compromises.
But my vote would go for a libertarian this time around.
As of this writing I really like Obama. He's intelligent, even-handed and he's got charisma. Yes, he's a young man who has only been in the Senate for a short time, but each time I hear him speak I come away even more impressed. In addition I trust him more than I do Hilary.
For the Republicans I still think it's Rudy. McCain has dropped badly as far as I'm concerned. Now Fred Thompson is thinking about running?
This will indeed be an interesting couple of years.
The 1 thing i think of when Obama's name and "lack" of experience is brought up is that John Kennedy was in the same boat atthe time, youg, inexperiened not to mention Roman Catholic, everyone said he could never win, history speaks for itself, wonder how the world would be today if he was still alive and had finished out his term, make for some interesting thought if nothing else
Schwarzenegger for Prez! Why? Because he can kick all the girlie men terrorist asses. To bad you don't allow foreign borns.
How about you guys allow an exception to that rule, and borrow someone from Canada? Our Prime Ministers (Canadian President) aren't too much into war, so you'll save a lot of money there, and for the last 10 years or so, even after the dot com bust and that recession that followed, we had a budget surplus. Beaver Power!
I'd like to see Hilary win. Edwards matches my goals better, and I believe he would be a better President, but I think Hilary would do more for the Dem party. For a long time after, the Dems would be identified as the "woman's" party, and garner future votes because of it. I'd rather see the Dems stronger for the future rather just get my personal agenda satisfied for 1 political cycle.
It's like (almost) a perfect storm. The stars are aligned in the heavens. The Repubs have self destructed on their own. They put an absolute ass in. Their base is demoralized and may not turn out the vote. Their traditional call to arms, budget, security, morality, is in tatters. They have lousy canidate (Thompson?). For once, they're faced with an equal money machine. They're going to be a weak opponent because they shot themselfs in the foot without help from anybody else. In short, they've screwed themselfs up.
For those who wonder if a woman can do the job, we've got Pelosie in the #2 slot. (Channey #2? Give me a break. Not in people's minds. In people's minds, she #2.)
So for 2yrs. we got a picture on the tube of the #2 in command doing at least a credible job. She's out performing Reid, and he's a man. Good image of women in power.
We've got good politicial strategist: Reme whateverhis name is and Schummer.
She's got the best politicial advisor in the world at her side, and is running a smart campaign while looking Presidential.
She can run on a respectable record.
People want a change so much (71-78% ?) they might accept anything as long as it a change.
Of all the canidates, she brings something to the office besides herself; ole smiley face.
They say that guy can sit in a room with a Dem and a Repub. and make them both feel he's agreed with them. Who better to be a roving ambassorador to patch our relationship with the rest of the world. Name somebody else? (Got to respect Edwards' wife. But if she dies while he's in office, how is he going to put in a decent 9-5.)
And how in the world can you claim to already have experience in the job without having been elected President before. That question belongs in the Jokes and Games forum under puzzles.
There are a lot of things the Dems can't control, and this time they all seem to have come in place for the Dems. I doubt the stage would be this well set for another 100 yrs.
Now's the time to do it. Get us in the history books as having the 1st. women president.
I'm not American, so I have no say in this, but I was appalled to see that not a single Republican candidate would allow a gay person to work in the military as a translator or other positions, even if that meant saving lives.
But when it comes to politicians, vote for the lesser evil
The Repulicians treat gays as a private matter that should only be indulged in behind closed doors, and not be seen in public. Sort of a "keep your personal life private," philophy, at least as far as Congressional pages go
I saw a debate on CNN with Wolf Blitzer, where he asked if any if them would support gays in the army, if it means saving soldiers lives. No one responded.Quote:
Originally Posted by TG
My personal beliefs are conservative in nature, but that was completely shocking and appaling
They certainly have their priorities straight, and deserve to be the moral guardians of us all. Avoiding an unwanted sexual advance is obviously worth a life or two
hon...he can't even pronounce California...lol...Quote:
Originally Posted by nk_lion
i like Obama but his name is too close to Osama which btw i accidentally typed once in another forum, when i meant Obama i said Osama grr
i'm for John Edwards...i voted for Kerry four years ago only because i really wanted Edwards..i believe he is for the middle classes...and no i don't think his butt his cute, as i've been accused of thinking grrr why do men think i like men's butts???