2008! The White House!

[reverend_kyle]

I'll be too young to vote until the 2012 election. I think it would be a real shame if the Republican Party did not nominate Mitt Romney just because he is a Mormon.

My history teacher told us that it is extremely unlikely that Barack Obama or Mitt Romney could be elected. His reasoning was that there has only been one time in US history that someone outside of the Protestant Christian camp has been elected (Kennedy).

And thank god you can't. Mitt Romney is a tool. Has no static beliefs of his own and if he does no one else knows them as he pretends to believe what the voters believe.

what a tool.

[unriggable]

i can't vote by less then a month!

which therefor means that i haven't really thought about it much, but i do really like Obama...

umm...i hope that isn't a pointless post, since the first post said no pointless posts...

EXACTLY the same here. I turn 18 on november 24 2008.

EDIT: I'm going for Obama, but Ron Paul is up there.

[Nobunaga]

...

And thank god you can't. Mitt Romney is a tool. Has no static beliefs of his own and if he does no one else knows them as he pretends to believe what the voters believe.

what a tool.

... Kyle, you're going to have to back that up with examples. Don't want to come off as the "Thread Polizei", but we're here to discuss, not to make vague negative comments with no offered evidence.

... You have something interesting on Romney? Share it, because I have no idea who I like just yet.

... >> Edit: Found your other thread. Never mind.

...

[unriggable]

...

And thank god you can't. Mitt Romney is a tool. Has no static beliefs of his own and if he does no one else knows them as he pretends to believe what the voters believe.

what a tool.

... Kyle, you're going to have to back that up with examples.

So a few years back Romney 'officially' announced he was pro-life instead of pro-choice (he was still gov of massachusetts, but he was probably planning a prez run and knew that republicans wouldn't vote for him if he was pro-choice). However, six months after that, in a speech in massachusetts, he says that he will defend a woman's right to an abortion. Pretty clear example of how he can't stick with one side.

[Nobunaga]

...

And thank god you can't. Mitt Romney is a tool. Has no static beliefs of his own and if he does no one else knows them as he pretends to believe what the voters believe.

what a tool.

... Kyle, you're going to have to back that up with examples.

So a few years back Romney 'officially' announced he was pro-life instead of pro-choice (he was still gov of massachusetts, but he was probably planning a prez run and knew that republicans wouldn't vote for him if he was pro-choice). However, six months after that, in a speech in massachusetts, he says that he will defend a woman's right to an abortion. Pretty clear example of how he can't stick with one side.

... He's a bit Libertarian on the issue, from what I understand. He says he is against abortion entirely, personally, but believes it not anything the government should attempt to regulate or control. Which explains being both "for" and "against", I think.

... It's a non-issue anyway... least it should be a non-issue.

...

[unriggable]

Agree. Lets keep regular abortion and ban partial birth. Everybodys happy.

[Nephilim]

Currently my favorite is John McCain. He would lead with this thing that's called "common sense". Most Democratic candidates don't seem to have that.

i really gotta question this (and not trying to start a fight, Nobunaga, just raising logical problems). McCain supported the surge and would have us believe that "staying the course" in Iraq is the best idea. caleb my friend, in at least these 2 cases, he has displayed very clearly the opposite of common sense.

Where's Ralph Nader!?!?! Nader in '08!

i heard him on the radio last nite. he's not running on the green ticket this time b/c the greens will not select a candidate until after the deadline for ballot entry in several states (silly move by them). he is running as an independent, and thus not on nobunaga's list.

I don't get how people think Hillary is conservative, by any stretch of the imagination.

i have a feeling this is b/c you are in the rightist male group that hates hilary so much, described by meggy. you have to understand, serbia, she is far more conservative in lots of ways than obama (just for example). i'd like to hear (in this thread if it's okay) why so many red state-types hate her so much.


i'd rather vote for bill clinton than anyone in this race. well, any of the actual frontrunners. i think bill richardson is probably the most attractive to me of all the candidates, but of course he's not really in the race.

this is the crazy thing about this election to me: the republicans have handed the democrats the easiest election they've had in a while. everyone hates bush and the war, and all of the current repub frontrunners have major problems with the party base. the dems would probably be smartest to just run john edwards, nothing to worry about, fairly easy victory.

but no, the dems are so disorganized and nutty, they're given the easiest election in recent memory, and who do they want to run? either a black man w/ a scary sounding name or the most hated woman in america. remember how the repubs got out the religious right vote by putting a bunch of anti-gay marriage amendments on key state ballots? the dems will insure the same kind of effect by running hilary. it's completely insane. and obama has no chance.

i will fearlessly predict at this point that fred thompson will win. he's like reagan redux. an actor who says the right things, plays on people's religious feelings, makes naive people feel warm inside, and is conservative on all the right things. if hilary or obama run for the dems, thompson will win handily. for all the repubs faults, they are far more shrewd politically, even in something as simple as choosing the right national candidate. thompson has to be thinking, "hey, all the other GOP candidates look terrible, and the dems are actually thinking about running 2 no-chance losers. this is a dream scenario for me!" he's a heart-warming good ole boy, a christian, and everyone has seen his face on film. no-brainer.....

rant over, sorry

[Nobunaga]

... The GOP might very well push for Rudy Giuliani as their candidate in 08, in spite of (IMHO) much better qualifications in others. Rudy Giuliani has fantastic name recognition, he is associated with heroics in the days immediately following the worst terrorist attack in US history, and he's centrist enough to avoid making major waves on many of the "Liberal's" star issues.

... In my opinion, McCain shot his campaign in the foot when he made those "back room deals" to create a bill with the most liberal of Senators for amnesty (note the italics, please) for illegals.

... Being associated with Ted Kennedy cannot be a good thing when vying for the GOP nomination.

... Of course I could be way off the mark here. We'll see.

... As for Edwards, they're (by they, I mean the GOP) going to have the ability to assassinate the man politically for his very unwise comment, calling the War on Terror a bumper sticker. Indirectly, also, I believe he'll be set up to be seen as using his wife's terminal illness for his own political gain. I'm already hearing this, actually.

... Thompson? he's a great voice for the job .... still looking at him, have no idea what he's all about at the moment.

...

[Nephilim]

... The GOP might very well push for Rudy Giuliani as their candidate in 08, in spite of (IMHO) much better qualifications in others. Rudy Giuliani has fantastic name recognition, he is associated with heroics in the days immediately following the worst terrorist attack in US history, and he's centrist enough to avoid making major waves on many of the "Liberal's" star issues.

... In my opinion, McCain shot his campaign in the foot when he made those "back room deals" to create a bill with the most liberal of Senators for amnesty (note the italics, please) for illegals.

... Being associated with Ted Kennedy cannot be a good thing when vying for the GOP nomination.

... Of course I could be way off the mark here. We'll see.

... As for Edwards, they're (by they, I mean the GOP) going to have the ability to assassinate the man politically for his very unwise comment, calling the War on Terror a bumper sticker. Indirectly, also, I believe he'll be set up to be seen as using his wife's terminal illness for his own political gain. I'm already hearing this, actually.

... Thompson? he's a great voice for the job .... still looking at him, have no idea what he's all about at the moment.

...

ya mate, imo, you're way off on a few points. giuliani is centrist enough to avoid trashing by the left? that's not an issue. the issue is he is far too liberal to appease the religious right. he cannot get out the republican vote in his wildest dreams. he's pro-all the wrong things, and he dressed in drag on video. as much as i wish they would, the republicans aren't foolish enough to nominate him. also, the smokescreen of his heroism post 9/11 won't hold up for long. he can talk all he wants about national security, but that's not gonna carry nearly enough cache.

and i think you're wrong about edwards. the point is this: the bumblings and gross errors of the bush admin have handed this election to the dems. the only thing they have to do is pick a safe enough candidate. edwards has the name recognition and plenty of likeability. but mainly he's white and he's not hilary. that's all it takes to win this election for the dems. but they don't seem to get that. and about that remark he made: every candidate has or will soon have a comment just like that, one that can be used as fodder by his/her opponents. don't make too much of it.

and it doesn't matter what thompson is "all about." he's a perfect candidate for the GOP this time around.

[Nobunaga]

... Care to place a wager?

... Given, say, Edwards (or ANY Dem) vs Rudy Giuliani, the hardcore right will vote for whom? Will they stay home?

... Need not answer that, actually, it was rhetorical. But I think Rudy Giuliani is headed for the GOP nomination, in spite of better candidates being available.

... Of course I see your points, and they are mostly valid.

...

[Sycophantman]

It's awfully hard to predict who ends up getting to the final round of elections in this cycle, there are so many factors to consider this time around. Personally, I think the Hillary hatred is a little overblown. Clearly, it exists, but the groups that have long hated Hillary, often irrationally, have long been the same groups with the most media access. It would be a hard fought battle, but I really do think that she could win. I think she could even get an unprecedented number of women votes in this election, perhaps something around 80-85% of all women votes. That's huge, huge to winning this thing. Honestly, who else in either party can connect with the women vote so completely?

There has been some talk about Obama conceding the nomination to Hillary and becoming her Vice-presidential candidate. I'm curious what some of you think about this. Would it hurt her chances or help?

[Molacole]

There has been some talk about Obama conceding the nomination to Hillary and becoming her Vice-presidential candidate. I'm curious what some of you think about this. Would it hurt her chances or help?

They might as well just hand over the win to the republicans! A black man AND a woman running for presidency is a bit overboard I think. It would be hard enough to get a woman president with a white man as her vice. It would be impossible to get a black man as our president regardless of his vice. Combining hillary with Obama is a recipe for disaster. They'll have every prejudice and male chauvinist in america (even the ones who probably wouldn't have vote) making it a point to vote against them.

I think hillary and obama have no realistic chance of winning independantly or joined in forces lol. That would be like saying racism and chauvinism doesn't exist in america...

As far as who I am voting for I honestly have no idea. I'm not even leaning the slightest amount towards any one person. All the current candidates make me depressed over the thought of where our country is headed. I don't see one person on that list who I think could or should be our president. Am I alone on this one or do most of you have your mind set on somebody you feel will do an outstanding job as our leader?

[Nephilim]

... Care to place a wager?

... Given, say, Edwards (or ANY Dem) vs Rudy Giuliani, the hardcore right will vote for whom? Will they stay home?

... Need not answer that, actually, it was rhetorical. But I think Rudy Giuliani is headed for the GOP nomination, in spite of better candidates being available.

... Of course I see your points, and they are mostly valid.

...

i'll make a wager of anything you want, mate. the hardcore right will indeed stay home or vote 3rd party before they vote for an abortion supporter like guliani. due to this, i very highly doubt he will get the nomination. the repubs maybe imperialist, greedy, inhuman bastards, but they're not dumb enough to give away an election by nominating someone who will alienate a huge part of the base....

and sycophant, hilary won't get the 80 plus % of the female vote. this is like saying women have no political views and would therefore vote for any woman who ran. red state women in the middle of this country will not vote for hilary. and any gains among women might be largely offset by a big chunk of men who will come out to vote against her, men who don't usually vote but would be drawn out by the hated hilary.

oh, and molly, for once we agree. none of them are exciting, b/c they're all fucking filthy criminals. they live by oppressing others. i think the answer for this country lies in opening up leadership to more parties.

[lalaland]

...(A) black man w/ a scary sounding name...

Obama is awesome... I would almost vote for him ONLY because of the name... not really, but I think that he has a good chance. Not that it matters what I say since I won't be old enough to vote in '08....

[spurgistan]

I'm personally no huge fan of Clinton's, but given how desperate the Repub's apparently are to give this election to the Dem's, it might be fun to see whether Red America really hates Hillary as much as the righty press and radio wants us to think. Or nominate a non-centrist, one of the guys in the second tier (Richardson, who I really like but he just can't get the press, has basically the only actual shot at getting nominated, but even he's more running for the veep spot, IMHO) Regardless, this election should be near impossible for the Democrats to blow, as I see it.

Then again, that's why we're Democrats, isn't it?

[Caleb the Cruel]

Currently my favorite is John McCain. He would lead with this thing that's called "common sense". Most Democratic candidates don't seem to have that.

i really gotta question this (and not trying to start a fight, Nobunaga, just raising logical problems). McCain supported the surge and would have us believe that "staying the course" in Iraq is the best idea. caleb my friend, in at least these 2 cases, he has displayed very clearly the opposite of common sense.

I'm only going to touch on this a tad bit as I don't want to turn this thread into a big Iraq debate. However I will say that if you want to win the war, you have to fight the war, running away doesn't work. THAT'S common sense.

[spurgistan]

But what if the war isn't winnable? Obviously, that's the reason why some people want to stay and some want to go, but "common sense" says that if you don't think a victory is meaningful to Iraq or even possible, you should get the hell out.

I personally don't claim to know whether this war is winnable or not, or whether a defeat of the insurgents would even make any difference to Iraq in the long-term, but the people who want a withdrawal (immediate or staged) think they do.

[unriggable]

I'm not sure what it would take for me to vote for hillary...she was pro-first-person-shooters-promotes-school-shootings.

[jay_a2j]

I'm not sure what it would take for me to vote for hillary...

I am.


Hell freezing over.

A sudden desire to destroy my country.

To go against all reason and logic and become a feminist power hungry liberal.


(It'll never happen...she would never get my vote)

[unriggable]

"Feminist power hungry"?

Brainwashed a bit?

[jay_a2j]

"Feminist power hungry"?

Brainwashed a bit?

You really should read up on the Clinton's, back as far as their Arkansas days.

[Nephilim]

I'm personally no huge fan of Clinton's, but given how desperate the Repub's apparently are to give this election to the Dem's, it might be fun to see whether Red America really hates Hillary as much as the righty press and radio wants us to think. Or nominate a non-centrist, one of the guys in the second tier (Richardson, who I really like but he just can't get the press, has basically the only actual shot at getting nominated, but even he's more running for the veep spot, IMHO) Regardless, this election should be near impossible for the Democrats to blow, as I see it.

Then again, that's why we're Democrats, isn't it?

i respect your opinion, so i would like to hear you weigh in on this. i agree that this election should be a walkover for the dems.

but don't you think they would really be killing themselves to run hilary or obama? no moderates will vote for them, plus either would really get out the vote for the opposition, imo. if the dems run either of 'em, all the GOP has to do is run fred thompson and it's over. what ya think?

[b.k. barunt]

Neph's right. The dems have it sewed up if they offer any candidate who would get the moderates. Hillary and Obama would be very poor choices for them at this point.

[Nephilim]

Neph's right. The dems have it sewed up if they offer any candidate who would get the moderates. Hillary and Obama would be very poor choices for them at this point.

ya, that's what i'm trying to say. they just need a candidate who can attract some moderates and not bring out the hilary haters/racists/sexists/people dumb enough to connect obama w/ radical islam.

i.e. john edwards. i don't like him at all (except he's from NC), but he is by far the most obvious choice to win for the dems, imo

[Nephilim]

this was going so well, what happened?