Who ya got? Presidential Style

[patrickdonohue]

I just got back from covering a Giuliani function here in Florida and as I talked to prospective voters at the function, it occurred to me that no one has a firm idea of who they are voting for, even as most state primaries sit just weeks away, if they haven't happened already. I wanted to see, in as civil a manner possible, who everyone is pulling for at this point. In other words, who is the raddest presidential candidate?

[ngower]

I live in New Hampshire so my job is done, I have no problems disclosing my vote: Ron Paul.

[joedubbs]

As a Republican from New York (it's not a myth) I'm going to probably vote for McCain in the primary if he's still around.

I'm not uber conservative though, I very well might vote for a Democrat in 08, just not Hillary.

[-mk-]

Ballsy thread, hope it stays peaceful. Obama is my homeboy.

[hepcat]

yeah, this is begging to get shut down.

several candidates on both sides have positions that I like (or at least can tolerate). I just don't want to see another president who thinks they are getting their instructions from the man upstairs.

[diane]

Personally I am torn.

I have always admired John McCain, the man is a hero.

Part of me wants Hilary because I thought Bill was a great president besides the personal scandals. Also, as a chick, well, frankly, I want to see a female president, the fact that it has take this long to get one who is even feasible is mind-blowing.

But that said, I want someone younger. Obama, though very liberal, would bring a really fresh breeze to Washington. It seems to be so established and incestial there, and he really does come across as different. Plus, we are so screwed on the world front, and he would really do wonders for our image. We need someone who isn't going to be so narrowly focused on the mainland and can see the impact the world will have on us. Heck, I just got back from driving an "American" car that had half the parts made outside America to a grocery store where I bought a bunch of items that probably less than a quarter was fully made in the States.

I just want someone who will lessen rules on small business, tighten rules on big business, balance the frikkin budget and start paying down the debt. And I would like it to be practical realistic plans, not fantasy plans or overly complicated.

But I know, I am just dreaming. And I am glad if it has made it three hours without getting bad...

[cybogoblin]

First things first, I'm a Kiwi, so I won't be voting in the Big One of '08.

Moving on, I noted that Huckabee has Chuck Norris supporting him and had a chuckle at their campaign ad. I think Huck and Chuck might have some serious competition from Obama, though, who appears to have his own celebrity endorsement (http://www.nohillaryclinton.com/blog/blog_images/obama-superman.jpg).

(No, I didn't link to Oprah)

[diane]

First things first, I'm a Kiwi, so I won't be voting in the Big One of '08.

Moving on, I noted that Huckabee has Chuck Norris supporting him and had a chuckle at their campaign ad. I think Huck and Chuck might have some serious competition from Obama, though, who appears to have his own celebrity endorsement (http://www.nohillaryclinton.com/blog/blog_images/obama-superman.jpg).

(No, I didn't link to Oprah)

That is so cute!

[patrickdonohue]

yeah, this is begging to get shut down.


I don't see it that way at all. I think all of the people on this board have something intelligent to say and can do so without being inflammatory or insulting. Because I don't agree with someone doesn't mean that I can't be civil or decent toward them. I feel optimistic that this thread can stay civil and be an avenue for an intelligent discourse on the candidates.

[comhcinc]

Ballsy thread, hope it stays peaceful.

yeah, this is begging to get shut down.

see, that's the problem in this country. there are too many people like these two who are, for some reason, afraid to get involve with civil discourse.




anyway i'm lucky in that i get to vote in both primaries. i'm voting for John Edwards(again) and John McCain(again). John & John, throw in some Dans and we can make some music.

oh and i wouldn't be surprised if Ron Paul won this state. He has a lot of support here.

[fashiondr]

I just want someone who will lessen rules on small business, tighten rules on big business, balance the frikkin budget and start paying down the debt. And I would like it to be practical realistic plans, not fantasy plans or overly complicated.

I vote for Diane!

Failing that I would probably have to go for Hilary or Obama. It's time for a radical change.

But then again since I'm not a citizen, I can't vote anyway. Guess I'll be staying home on election day along with most of the country...

[gobias]

Kucinich is the closest fitting candidate to my positions but he doesn't have a chance for the most part because of the media.
I'm sick and tired of the media trying to pick our president for us. "Fair and balanced" is bollocks and bias does not belong in reporting but unfortunately that's just the way it is.
In addition, the presidential debates are a joke. The networks are using them as entertainment and not for informative purposes.

[gobias]

I just don't want to see another president who thinks they are getting their instructions from the man upstairs.

I hear ya. We're screwed if Huckabee somehow manages to make his way into The White House.

[comhcinc]

Kucinich is the closest fitting candidate to my positions but he doesn't have a chance for the most part because of the media.
I'm sick and tired of the media trying to pick our president for us. "Fair and balanced" is bollocks and bias does not belong in reporting but unfortunately that's just the way it is.
In addition, the presidential debates are a joke. The networks are using them as entertainment and not for informative purposes.

completely clueless. Kucinich doesn't stand a chance because a majority of voters don't agree with his platform. you act as if he didn't spend months on the ground in Iowa talking to people and he still didn't get 5% there.

I love the way everyone always tries to blame the big evil "media" for every thing. if you had any memory you would realize that just 6 months ago the "media" was only taking about Hilary and Rudy. if you pay attention to the "media" now, you'll see that those two haven't won it. the "media" only reports and discusses the events, including polls, money raised, etc,etc,etc.

a Bias does belong in reporting. in fact it's impossible to strip it out.

and finally while the networks have sponsored some debates, most of them are being sponsored by other players.

i hate it when people go off on uninformed rants. there are a lot of things that are really wrong in this world, but as long as people are uneducated( and just happy with it) we are never going to be able to fix it.

[patrickdonohue]

As a journalist, I think I can shed some light on this bias issue. I think unlike people who don't do what we do for a living, we try, as best we can, to remove any and all biases from our reporting and what we do. When someone reads the work we do, they come in with a cannon-full of opinion and their own biases. Every reader, when they read something you've done, interjects their own biases and opinions on the work you've done and sees it through a prism that is unique to them. I stood on a tarmac recently, one of two journalists, interviewing Mike Huckabee before he flew back to Iowa, a night before the caucus and while I certainly don't share the some of the same views he does, I think the story that I wrote for the following day's paper reflected a tone of someone who was neither here nor there about any of his policy positions. That's the goal. I wouldn't say that objectivity is impossible but it is certainly something every (ethical) reporter should strive for on every single assignment they go out on. When I do stories about someone who is passionate (or in most cases angry) about something, they will ask me what I think. I've never told a source what I think about something that I'm reporting on because it's not my job to have an opinion. It's my job to report all of the facts as thoroughly and as accurately as I can and let you decide when you read the story what you think. Just an inside opinion on objectivity.

[esophagus]

Just a suggestion guys, but I'm guessing we should keep this as a thread on people you like, and not people (or other peoples choices) you dislike. That's the path that'll get this closed.

[comhcinc]

Just a suggestion guys, but I'm guessing we should keep this as a thread on people you like, and not people (or other peoples choices) you dislike. That's the path that'll get this closed.

i guess that is surpose to be directed at me. i was just refuting that claim that the reason Denis Kucinich has to do with the "media" and not with the fact that most people don't agree with Denis Kucinich. i never made my opinion of Kucinich known.


Keep Watching Them Skies!

[gobias]

i hate it when people go off on uninformed rants. there are a lot of things that are really wrong in this world, but as long as people are uneducated( and just happy with it) we are never going to be able to fix it.

I find it intriguing that this is coming from a community college student.

[lnknpk04]

Not sure who I like for the vote. I'm leaning toward Obama, but do like Edwards. I'm interested in Hillary, but dont know enough about her. It'll be a while before I make a decision. No rushing such an important decision :).

[comhcinc]

I find it intriguing that this is coming from a community college student.
hmmm so what? i guess that is surpose to be some type of insult. what that since i am going to a community college i am some how lacking in something? i guess my time spent in the military and the fact that i work for U.S. Missle Defense doesn't mean anything? would it make you feel better to know that i am transfering to Belmont University (http://www.belmont.edu/) in the fall?


see. uniformed. you just look plain silly.

[diane]

I find it intriguing that this is coming from a community college student.

Dude, not cool, not cool at all.

I am from Cleveland and I have been dealing with K for a lot of years. I agree completely with Comhcinc. And after his whole alien space craft comment, I am somewhat surprised that he got 5%.

Yes, Comhcinc is being a bit aggressive, but frankly Comhcinc is always aggressive. But that comment was uncalled for.

[diane]

I vote for Diane!




Thank you, that is so sweet! Maybe in 5 years...

[betaflame]

I personally think Ron Paul has some of the best ideas, even if they are a little radical.

He also understands economics for the most part, and is willing to admit when he doesn't understand a concept or idea completely. He's willing to take the time and effort to doing more research on a subject than rushing in and making a broad, sweaping statement.

As far as other candidates go, I won't name names. But keeping the constitution the way it is and knowing and understanding it are a MUST for any candidate in my book.

[betaflame]

Thank you, that is so sweet! Maybe in 5 years...

Diane for Pres in 2012!

[serenity]

I would vote for (this may sound odd) Kucinich or Ron Paul. Though neither has a chance in hell.

Failing that, I suppose I'd go for Obama. Meh. I would vote for Clinton just to get a female in (since I don't like any "popular" candidate, what happens is I end up voting for things like "female" "not another Christian white guy") but then we would have had 24 years straight of Clintons and Bushs and that kinda makes me uncomfortable. I don't know, I'll think about it.

I just want change, real change in the White House and I don't think any popular candidate is going to give us that. They are all the same old, same old except for their sex and skin color. I agree with a lot of Paul's Libertarian views so I would be happy with him as President as my second choice. Kucinich is my #1, though I would like him to be a bit more Libertarian, ha.

[stringtheory]

i'm extremely involved in american politics. and all for not, considering i'm a canadian.

regardless, my democratic vote would go to Obama. hopefully he keeps up Edwards as his running mate. i love that guy.

republican i want to dearly to vote for Paul. he represents exactly what a politician should be. straight talking, fiscally aware, steadfast in his beliefs. it's really too bad he's painted as a loon and the MSM supports that perspective.

[tectec]

I've been following Obama for a couple years now. I guess what fascinated me was his youth and optimism. He seems like an honest guy and he acknowledges the "mistakes" he made in his past. How many other politicians are too afraid to admit they're human?

He'll enter the presidency in debt not to the lobbyists and corporate interests but the American people because we'll put him in office. I also don't see Obama making religion an issue. Religion is a personal thing. You can have your beliefs and I can have mine. And I think he understands that pushing your beliefs on others especially through political policy would only polarize the nation.

He offers a message of hope and change (which everybody else seems to be clinging to now) and his presidency would be a fresh start for our country. He has great expectations from the American people to help that change happen. Obama has very little emotional or political baggage that will affect him.

Its actually a pleasure to listen to an intelligent person speak for once. He's even funny! Obama's wife seems like she'd take the role of First Lady seriously and help that change happen.

And I haven't even mentioned that he's black. Who cares? Hillary is a woman. Who cares? Lets focus instead on who they are as a human being. Focus on their past performance, their plans for the future, and their potential ability to get those plans carried out.

[0garrett0]

Personally I like Gravel the best out of everyone running, but I’ll miss being old enough to vote by 2 weeks.

On Election Day I’m going to city hall to protest for my favorite person not running.


http://www.cinematographers.nl/GreatDoPh/Films/DrStrangelove3.jpg
Strangelove For Strange Times!

[cogito]

Personally I'm torn between Obama and Edwards. I like his whole stance on poverty and Big Business, and he's the only one who I actually believe would, if he were president, do what he promises regarding said issues. But there's something about Obama that is very, refreshing, as it were.
As for Hillary, while she might turn out to be a very good president were she elected, to me she seems duplicitous and calculating. (Remember the Fox News cackle?) So does I-wanna-double-Guantanamo-Romney. This is just me but, I don't care for people who just say what they think people want to hear so they can win an election.

[diane]

This is just me but, I don't care for people who just say what they think people want to hear so they can win an election.

In the 30 years of living I have not met single person who hasn't done this in some fashion. Heck my son does it regularly in the pursuit of Italian Ice, pokemon cards, extra cuddle time, you name it. It normally comes in the fashion of "I'll mop the floor", I'll go to bed early tomorrow", etc.

To me, the only difference in politicians when it comes to sincerity is their acting abilities. Some of really good actors, some aren't. Bush, the straight shooter, good actor, Gore, bad actor. And well, you can draw your own conclusions on whether that worked well.

But this is why I like politics, to me it's just like a huge on-going traveling production. There are writers, directors, actors, stage managers and stage hands, the whole shebang. Heck there are even costume and props. And with politics there are never re-runs and writer's strikes.

[comhcinc]

In the 30 years of living I have not met single person who hasn't done this in some fashion.

But this is why I like politics, to me it's just like a huge on-going traveling production. There are writers, directors, actors, stage managers and stage hands, the whole shebang. Heck there are even costume and props. And with politics there are never re-runs and writer's strikes.

you make great points. why do people expect politicans to be any different from the rest of us? i think it's some kind of hold over from monarchy.

i've been in love with politics for a long time, in fact it's better than sex (http://www.amazon.com/Better-Than-Sex-Gonzo-Papers/dp/0345396359). it's very much like a drug. once you really start following all the twist and turns you really get a understand of however thing works, and how close every thing is to falling apart every day.

[cybogoblin]

better than sex (http://www.amazon.com/Better-Than-Sex-Gonzo-Papers/dp/0345396359)

Aw man, I wish Hunter could be here to see this election. It would have provided him with enough material for another too books, easily.

[yssman]

I did my part earlier this week and was among 55,000 supporters for Ron Paul in Michigan. Of course, we only recieved 6% of the vote, but hey... His ideas have gotten out into the mainstream, so thats all that matters.

I'm a political science student here in Grand Rapids at Aquinas College, a liberal arts school that has a pretty good reputation at turning out some fairly awesome Poli Sci workers. We've had a helluva time cracking this one open and breaking it down, and my guess is that it will only get worse...

If I were to pick a Democrat, I'd have to go with Obama. He is the only candidate that stands a chance of doing something, making Americans excited to get out there and vote, and hopefully making a difference in the White House. I still find Hillary to be a bit too much of a "WASP" of sorts, not really changing much as compared to Bush and the like. I honestly don't know enough about Edwards, but I think he'd make an excellent running mate with Obama.

As for the Republicans, I've stated before that I love Ron Paul to death. But, like most of his supporters know, in the end he won't get the nomination. I would shift my support to McCain (I got to see him in person last week), but I'm a bit weary. The "populist" Huckabee has my secondary backing thus far, but like others have said, his overtly Christian overtones is a big problem.

Either way, its going to be a good race. I'm interested in what will happen in Nevada and South Carolina this weekend, hopefully we see the field clear out a bit afterwards...

[hepcat]

see, that's the problem in this country. there are too many people like these two who are, for some reason, afraid to get involve with civil discourse.




anyway i'm lucky in that i get to vote in both primaries. i'm voting for John Edwards(again) and John McCain(again). John & John, throw in some Dans and we can make some music.

oh and i wouldn't be surprised if Ron Paul won this state. He has a lot of support here.

listen buddy, you don't know squat about me (or I suspect -MK- either). your posts are the kind of crap that led me to predict this would get shut down in the first place.


I'll put the amount of hours I've logged working on various campaigns up against you any day of the week. In fact. I would be very surprised if you have gotten involved in the process beyond voting. I would be happy to be wrong on this, but I'm not am I?

[comhcinc]

lIn fact. I would be very surprised if you have gotten involved in the process beyond voting. I would be happy to be wrong on this, but I'm not am I?

in fact you are completely wrong. i'm a founding memeber of the north alabama green party as well as a current memeber of Iraq Veterans Agaisnt the War. i've been apart of plenty of protest including seattle in 1999. so you know what ever, that is beside the point.

none of that has to do with civil discourse. which by the way doesn't mean "civil" as in nice(though i see no reason why it should be on here) but "civil" as to mean public policy. any time some one posts a thread about that(like this one) there is always some one who feels the need to claim the thread will be shut down. why? because they are afraid of it.

[tokenuser]

I personally think Ron Paul has some of the best ideas, even if they are a little radical.

He also understands economics for the most part, and is willing to admit when he doesn't understand a concept or idea completely. Like evolution, and racial equality??

The caucus' and primaries might be a time for party members to voice who they would like to see on the presedential ballot, but there comes a time when - with largely single digit nomination results (and Iowa at 10% only just there) - his followers need to say, "Paul is no where near having enough votes to carry him at the convention - who of the top three most embody Paul's ideals ... if we can't have Paul, we need to support someone like him."

There are 7 delegates currently seperating the top three Democrats, and 33 seperating the top three Republicans. All Ron Paul is doing currently is diluting the pool for the people that might actually have a chance of getting to the nomination.

[diane]

Like evolution, and racial equality??

The caucus' and primaries might be a time for party members to voice who they would like to see on the presedential ballot, but there comes a time when - with largely single digit nomination results (and Iowa at 10% only just there) - his followers need to say, "Paul is no where near having enough votes to carry him at the convention - who of the top three most embody Paul's ideals ... if we can't have Paul, we need to support someone like him."

There are 7 delegates currently seperating the top three Democrats, and 33 seperating the top three Republicans. All Ron Paul is doing currently is diluting the pool for the people that might actually have a chance of getting to the nomination.


What I am waiting to see is since it is pretty inevitable that Ron Paul will not win the Republican Nomination, if he will accept the Libertarian nomination and the impact from that. What I have found to be truly amazing is the dedication his supporters have, it is quite impressive. I do not agree with many of his messages, I guess I would be considered more centrist in the scope of politics, I am impressed with the passion he is able to bring out in people.

[betaflame]

Like evolution, and racial equality??

"who of the top three most embody Paul's ideals ... if we can't have Paul, we need to support someone like him."

All Ron Paul is doing currently is diluting the pool for the people that might actually have a chance of getting to the nomination.

Sadly, it has been noted, that he often votes alone against the other 435 congressmen on laws he doesn't agree with. Which tells me there aren't any candidates currently running who are even remotely close to his ideals in my book.

He will get my vote, but he won't win the election. And if the next president continues to run the gov't into the ground, I will know my vote went to the right place.

[comhcinc]

There are 7 delegates currently seperating the top three Democrats, and 33 seperating the top three Republicans. All Ron Paul is doing currently is diluting the pool for the people that might actually have a chance of getting to the nomination.

i wouldn't quiet sell out Paul yet. here in alabama he has alot of surport, and i know that the same is true for mississippi and tennessee. while of course this isn't enough to win, it is enough to make the national convention very interesting

[cbroz91]

I'm an Obama fan, and i would love to see what "The guys" think about this.

[zedizdead]

I'm an Obama fan, and i would love to see what "The guys" think about this.

They said they listen to NPR. Hellllloooooo? That doesn't mean they are for Obama, but it gives a good indication on what they believe politically. I could be wrong tho.

But personally I would rather they not talk about this. I watch this show for entertainment.

[diane]

They said they listen to NPR. Hellllloooooo? That doesn't mean they are for Obama, but it gives a good indication on what they believe politically. I could be wrong tho.

But personally I would rather they not talk about this. I watch this show for entertainment.

What are you implying about NPR? I am a fiscally conservative person and I listen to NPR all the time. My morning isn't right without Marketplace.

[comhcinc]

i have to agree. i also constantly listen to NPR. i had no clue that meant i support someone (who is it anyway?)

[tokenuser]

What are you implying about NPR? I am a fiscally conservative person and I listen to NPR all the time. My morning isn't right without Marketplace.Ditto - and there is nothing wrong with being fiscally conservative.

[diane]

i have to agree. i also constantly listen to NPR. i had no clue that meant i support someone (who is it anyway?)

I think that because of some show hosts, like Diane Rehms, Garrison Keilor and Ira Glass, all who make their political affiliations known, many people assume that NPR is liberal. I find that to be very funny, since when listening to NPR, it is for the most part, incredibly well balanced, or even neutral (I don't find Car Talk or Science Friday to really have any political take for the most part). And, when listening to Prairie Home Companion or This American Life, both really don't address politics, but are more an artistic take on life.

Diane Rehms, well, her show is an interview show, so there can be a conflict in some sense, but she is far from an O'Reilly or a Limbaugh. Even on her weekly round-up she has someone from at least one well acknowledge conservative press outlet, like my beloved Wall Street Journal.

Shows like Marketplace and Morning Edition regularly have a mix of editorialists, from all over the spectrum, many having served in various presidental appointments, from Reagan on up.

I always like to ask what shows they have listened to in order to draw that conclusion, or if this is based on second-hand information.

Overall, I would just like to point out that NPR/PBS consistently scores number 1 for the most informed viewers/listeners in the facts concerning world events, geography and finance over any other news outlet. Guess who comes in last.

[enemybrick]

Well, here in Chicago, its rare to find someone who doesn't want Obama. You'd think that with all of the corruption in our city, we would be a little more conservative when it comes to our choice of Presidents.

[hepcat]

in fact you are completely wrong. i'm a founding memeber of the north alabama green party as well as a current memeber of Iraq Veterans Agaisnt the War. i've been apart of plenty of protest including seattle in 1999. so you know what ever, that is beside the point.

none of that has to do with civil discourse. which by the way doesn't mean "civil" as in nice(though i see no reason why it should be on here) but "civil" as to mean public policy. any time some one posts a thread about that(like this one) there is always some one who feels the need to claim the thread will be shut down. why? because they are afraid of it.


I stand corrected and am happy to be wrong. Many people I run into online, particularly those who are the most outspoken, are long on words and short on action. Thank you for being so involved.

I wasn't implying that I wanted it to get shut down, and I am certainly not afraid of it. In my experience these threads devolve quickly and accomplish little. I am glad that this Rad community is able to carry on.

[toolegit2kwit]

If listening to Naked Panda Radio is wrong i don't want to be right!... I have been a fan of Obama since the 2004 convention and I will be campaigning for him in November and if the race is still on when the primaries come around in PA ill be there too.

Here is the real question for these forums, What is the best candidate for geeks?

[p2a1x7]

The caucus' and primaries might be a time for party members to voice who they would like to see on the presedential ballot, but there comes a time when - with largely single digit nomination results (and Iowa at 10% only just there) - his followers need to say, "Paul is no where near having enough votes to carry him at the convention - who of the top three most embody Paul's ideals ... if we can't have Paul, we need to support someone like him."

I hate to bring in some conflict, but I don't see any Republican that is anti-war and for a smaller government. I support Ron Paul because of his stance on giving the states back some power to govern themselves. With the other candidates so alike I don't see how Ron Paul is diluting anything. He's unique when it comes to Republicans unlike any of the other "top 5".

If Ron Paul doesn't run as an independent (I doubt he'll run for the LP) then I'll probably vote LP or not vote at all.

[diane]

I find it kinda funny how many people are Libertarian in stance on these forums. Though I agree with many aspects of the Libertarian platform, I simply can not agree with them on their stances on education and health care. To get rid of public education would undermine the economy. Yes, many public schools are broken, but when you look at countries where primary education has to be paid for versus those that provided to every child, well, the difference economically is huge. Even though our schools are broken, the majority of our residents can read and do simple math, something most countries where primary education must be paid for cannot claim.

And their odd stance on immigration is a little puzzling since it is obviously an attempt to out government programs, but logically would ultimately create a two-tier system in the country for generations, potentially causing even more disparity between rich and poor.

Yes, more power in some aspects needs to be given back to the states. But the federal government does serve a purpose, one that cannot be ignored. Look at China. There is an example of a small federal government that is powerless to bring real change to their country. They are even having a hard time shutting down factories that use slave labor because of the lack of power, much all the other issues they are having.

Yes we need more balance, I truly do believe that, these past 6 years have really drilled home that the federal government, the president particularly, needs to be checked.

But I don't mind paying taxes if that helps everyone become better educated and pays our troops.

Though, I have to admit, there is a part of me that wonders how many people are Libertarian because they support legalization and want out of the war. If the Democratic party supported legalization, I can't help but wonder how many would switch. But maybe I am just too cynical.

[serenity]

I find it kinda funny how many people are Libertarian in stance on these forums. Though I agree with many aspects of the Libertarian platform, I simply can not agree with them on their stances on education and health care. To get rid of public education would undermine the economy. Yes, many public schools are broken, but when you look at countries where primary education has to be paid for versus those that provided to every child, well, the difference economically is huge. Even though our schools are broken, the majority of our residents can read and do simple math, something most countries where primary education must be paid for cannot claim.

And their odd stance on immigration is a little puzzling since it is obviously an attempt to out government programs, but logically would ultimately create a two-tier system in the country for generations, potentially causing even more disparity between rich and poor.

Yes, more power in some aspects needs to be given back to the states. But the federal government does serve a purpose, one that cannot be ignored. Look at China. There is an example of a small federal government that is powerless to bring real change to their country. They are even having a hard time shutting down factories that use slave labor because of the lack of power, much all the other issues they are having.

Yes we need more balance, I truly do believe that, these past 6 years have really drilled home that the federal government, the president particularly, needs to be checked.

But I don't mind paying taxes if that helps everyone become better educated and pays our troops.

Though, I have to admit, there is a part of me that wonders how many people are Libertarian because they support legalization and want out of the war. If the Democratic party supported legalization, I can't help but wonder how many would switch. But maybe I am just too cynical.

Well, look at someone like me. I would vote Kucinich if I could, but my #2 choice is Paul. I don't love everything he stands for and the thought of another ultra-religious guy in the White House scares me silly but at least he wants to stick to the ideals that our country was founded on. I'm a Libertarian/Democrat mix I suppose. I would like the federal government to have *much* less control than they do now but I don't want it gone completely.
Besides, even if Paul got elected, there is no way he would be able to put everything he stands for in effect. It would just be a step in the right direction.

BTW, I would vote for Diane in a heartbeat!

[jason-h]

None of the Republicans or Democrats have anything new to say. If i vote for them i get more of the same. My personal view of the Republicans and thier usual suspects is that while they slowly destroy our country financially, they line thier pockets. In converse of that the Democrats and thier usual suspects slowly destroy our country financially but give it away. Both have slowly eroded our civil liberties by passing law after law after law, most of which they never read or even have staff review and summarize. They normally vote with the party and that's that. Not matter what it says or who it affects. These votes and vetos are nothing more than political currency to them. They no longer represent ME. In reality when it comes to the elections and voting, i always vote with my conscience. I have gone to every candidates website and read thier issues section and they range from stunning amounts of double talk, down to really scary. So when i go to vote, i'll vote my conscience. I'll vote for Ron Paul. At least i know that i'll be able to sleep that night knowing that he is the closest to my personal views of all the candidates.

[comhcinc]

to all you Ron Paul surporters. question: It doesn't bother you that for years Ron Paul published a newsletter that was full of homophobic and racial slurs?

[diane]

Okay, I have got to ask, because the responses on this forum are just so different from the statistics I get to view every day, what is everyone's view on Healthcare. Nationalize it? Leave it be? Down with Medicare and Medicaid? Get rid of the FDA? I am work in the evil Healthcare industry so I am very knowledgeable all many aspects of this debate (currently in school to become an actuary). But I have to tell you I don't even have a clear ideal on this one. Maybe it's because I am to deep with the statistics of our own country and the studies of other countries with different healthcare formats.

Is healthcare a right or a responsibility, or both? What about healthcare that can better public health such as vaccines, do you see that as a personal choice or a national responsibility?

The comments here are so different from I hear in doctors offices, corporate board rooms, and classes, it's nice to get a perspective that is not from people in the industry.

[comhcinc]

i believe the best apporoach is a single-payer systerm with the option to buy extra private insurance. it makes sense to me for three reasons.

We are the richest country in the world. we should take pride in ourselves and help each other.

It's cheaper over all. ever been to costco and bought that giant jar of pickles? it's cheap ain't it. things cost less when bought in bulk. that's a simple fact. a single-payer systerm would be cheaper for everyone.

It's good for business. Not only would it take the pressure off companies (both big and small) but people will be healthy, meaning less time took off sick.

[jason-h]

to all you Ron Paul surporters. question: It doesn't bother you that for years Ron Paul published a newsletter that was full of homophobic and racial slurs?

Of course it does. Is any other candidate any better? Every candidate has said, done or even passed legislation that attempts to cheapen or strengthen a specific group of people. Ask any candidate about thier stance on gay rights. None will offer you any legitimate equality. Ask any candidate about affirmative action. None will offer you anything resembling equality. They will hide behind doubletalk so they don't lose any religious votes. On top of that the candidates that are really religious, have no other choice but to be intolerant of others because thier religion demands it. Non believers or those in violation of the holy bible are held in contempt. Again i come back to Ron Paul for me because he is the least of all the evils. Less government and raw capitalism is the only thing in my opinion that will save our country in the long run.

[comhcinc]

Of course it does. Is any other candidate any better?

yes i have yet to see any other candidate say anything near the racial and homophobic things that was pulished by Paul.

[jason-h]

yes i have yet to see any other candidate say anything near the racial and homophobic things that was pulished by Paul.

Then you should be looking closer.

[cybogoblin]

Here is the real question for these forums, What is the best candidate for geeks?

I can't think of any one candidate who could appear to geeks more than the others, except maybe Richardson. He wanted to build a spaceport in, iirc, New Mexico. I think that is about as geeky as the race gets.

(I'm not counting contendors having YouTube accounts as geeky because anybody can have one nowdays)

[tokenuser]

If it is candidates for geeks, then it has to be McCain - for no other reason except for the number of times he has appeared on The Daily Show.

[comhcinc]

Then you should be looking closer.

i'm going to state right now that i think you are completely full of it. i could of course be wrong. i have yet to find any thing as bad as saying Martian Luther King Jr. ''seduced underage girls and boys'' or "I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities."

but hey pretend i am from missouri, and show me.

[tectec]

Okay, I have got to ask, because the responses on this forum are just so different from the statistics I get to view every day, what is everyone's view on Healthcare. Nationalize it? Leave it be? Down with Medicare and Medicaid? Get rid of the FDA? I am work in the evil Healthcare industry so I am very knowledgeable all many aspects of this debate (currently in school to become an actuary). But I have to tell you I don't even have a clear ideal on this one. Maybe it's because I am to deep with the statistics of our own country and the studies of other countries with different healthcare formats.

Is healthcare a right or a responsibility, or both? What about healthcare that can better public health such as vaccines, do you see that as a personal choice or a national responsibility?

I'd like to see the US adopt a program where all citizens have a right to free basic health care. I saw "Sicko" and while Michael Moore portrayed the best possible scenario when it comes to government-run health care, I feel the actual real life program would be far more efficient than what we have in place right now.

If spending billions upon billions of dollars, along with risking thousands of lives, is considered a national responsibility then I'd like to think we could maybe spend less on "defense" and more on ensuring a healthier population. Heck, we could even put a few of those defense dollars toward education.

As for the FDA, I feel they are defending the interests of corporations instead of those of the citizens. Especially when it comes to things like the approval of new drugs. As long as the drug in question does better than a placebo then it must be ok, right? They also just approved the consumption of cloned animals without any additional labeling requirements. The thing is......I kind of like to know what I'm eating.

The other day I watched a very interesting film about the drug industry and its questionable practices. Maybe if you did a google search for "Big Bucks Big Pharma torrent" you might stumble across it. So much money is spent on those silly drug commercials and even on doctors.

[autodas]

Ron Paul for President.

[moneytime]

Obama or Edwards.

[jason-h]

i'm going to state right now that i think you are completely full of it. i could of course be wrong. i have yet to find any thing as bad as saying Martian Luther King Jr. ''seduced underage girls and boys'' or "I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities."

but hey pretend i am from missouri, and show me.

Ok let me start by saying that the following is a mere sampling of the stuff that i found especially for you, because you have put the burden of proof on me and apparently you aren't willing to "look closer" yourself like i suggested. You have yet to find any thing as bad? You have the same internet i have. My challenge to you is tell me what's good about a candidate or your candidate. The burden of proof is on you now my friend.

Hillary Clinton- Please go to Her website and read reforming our immigration system in her issues section. There’s nothing real in there. Other than a bunch of double talk and her support of the dream act which is quite possibly the most disgusting piece of legislation ever. It basically says if you want to be a citizen, join our military for automatic citizenship. Could you possibly exploit someone who is poor and 90% of the time a minority any more than that, while also keeping your military full of warm bodies in uniform to continue a war that you authorized.



Senator Clinton has said she didn't properly read nor understand the document she signed which authorized military action against Iraq. On meet the press, the moderator pointed out that the title of the resolution is:

“Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.”

Clinton responded saying, “We can have this Jesuitical argument about what exactly was meant. But when Chuck Hagel, who helped to draft the resolution said, 'It was not a vote for war,' What I was told directly by the White House in response to my question, 'If you are given this authority, will you put the inspectors in and permit them to finish their job,' I was told that's exactly what we intended to do. ”

Please note that she SIGNED this authorization. This is horrible on 2 fronts, allowing force to be used without a “declaration of war” and Specifically force on Iraqi’s who to date have lost over 2 million citizens during our occupation. Is that racial? I don’t know but it seems as though the last 6+ years have been pretty tough if you are of middle eastern decscent or Iraqi.

She also opposes same sex marriage---this shouldn’t be a state or federal issue at all.

Whitewater? Ethics, yeah right.

Shining example of stupidity "We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."



Barack Obama - Supports economic sanctions against Iran. Sanctions that affect the citizen and not the politicians.

Here’s a short article about Barack and his ethics. This particular article really gave me pause. I didn’t expect him to abuse his powers like that.

http://www.nationalledger.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=10&num=12074



John Edwards --- This guy doesn’t really offer anything concrete that I can tell, but again if we want to talk discrimination, feel free to read his “universal coverage” plan…note it doesn’t say universal heath care. The last line in his outline states “Once these steps have been taken, requiring all American residents to get insurance.” Yeah lets force people who can’t afford it to get “coverage” anyway. His website is full of garbage in the issues section that don’t really say or do anything.

Capital Punishment “I believe the death penalty is the most fitting punishment for the most heinous crimes, and I support it.” This affects everyone but I can’t condone a policy of the state or federal government saying yes we can take your life. Life in prison, ok but not the death penalty. The vast majority of people in prison in the US are minorities.

[On the idea that the issue of same-sex marriage affected the outcome of the 2004 Presidential election] I think they had an impact, but I don’t support gay marriage, John Kerry didn’t support gay marriage. I think it is an enormous mistake for us the Democratic Party, or me to become something I’m not.

This one last thing about Edwards is slightly off topic but what jerk decides to go ahead and run for president after her finds out his wife has cancer? Not cool.

Rudy Giuliani -- Racism-- Sheriff Richard Stanek was appointed to the post of chair of Minnesota Law Enforcement for Rudy. The campaign's press release promised that Stanek "will work with law enforcement personnel throughout the state to communicate Mayor Giuliani's record of fighting crime and his commitment to first responders."

But as a rival campaign has pointed out to us, it turns out Stanek has admitted to having a history of racially charged remarks. He was forced to resign his post as Minnesota's public safety commissioner in 2004 after it came to light that he'd admitted in a deposition that he'd used racist slurs in the past, including repeated use of the word "******."

This isn't the first time this has happened to Rudy. Last June, he appointed a new co-chair to his South Carolina campaign who also had a history of racially charged remarks.



Anti Gay-- Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, told The Hill Saturday that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) would support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Perkins said Giuliani told him in a private meeting that if the Defense of Marriage Act appeared to be failing or if multiple states began to legalize same-sex marriages, then he would support the constitutional amendment.

Giuliani did not mention the amendment or the issue of gay marriage during his address to the Values Voters Summit, but that position could win him favor with some social conservatives who view the former mayor warily.

Perkins said that was not enough to assuage his concerns about Giuliani, but "it was nice to hear."



Shining example of WTF "I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them." --on being exposed to the same health risks as workers at ground zero after the 9/11 attacks. This guy disgusts me.



John McCain -- Racism--- On his campaign bus recently(march 2000), Sen. John McCain told reporters, "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." Umm yeah, not the brightest remark to make on a CAMPAIGN bus full of REPORTERS. Yes I know what happened to you but please turn on the brain to mouth filter.


Many may not be aware that Senator John McCain voted against making Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Day a federal holiday in 1983. He later apologized for this vote and claimed it was a mistake. However, he has continued to associate himself with known racists.

McCain’s chief South Carolina Spokesman is Richard Quinn, founder and editor in chief of the magazine “Southern Heritage”. According to Salon.com:

Quinn’s articles have called Nelson Mandela a “terrorist” and King a man “whose role in history was to lead his people into a perpetual dependence on the welfare state, a terrible bondage of body and soul.” In another piece, Quinn said of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, “What better way to reject politics as usual than to elect a maverick like David Duke?”…

Why does John McCain continue to employ Richard Quinn as a spokesman? While he himself may disavow racism, paying a person like Quinn is a tacit approval of his beliefs.

O_O What?! Ooookaaayyyy? Where did he meet these guys?



Gay rights--- Seems that McCain can’t get his story straight regarding civil unions. Event though he supported the Arizona ban that would prevent both gay marriage and civil unions, he first told George Stephanopoulos that he wasn’t against civil unions. Then, he changed his mind:

Host George Stephanopoulos asked McCain why he supported the measure, saying it “actually denied any government benefits to civil unions or domestic partnerships. Are you against civil unions for gay couples?”

First McCain said: “No, I’m not.”

“I think that initiative did allow for people to join in legal agreements such as power of attorney and others,” he said. “I think that there was a difference of opinion on the interpretation of that constitutional amendment in Arizona.”

“So you’re for civil unions?” Stephanopoulos asked.

“No,” he said. “I do not believe gay marriage should be legal. I do not believe gay marriage should be legal,” he repeated. “But I do believe that people ought to be able to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways that people have relationships can enter into.”

Later, he came back: “I just want to point out again: I believe that gay marriage should not be legal. OK?”

O_o Huh?!

In case you have some trouble using the internet to read about the candidates and the above is just too much to take in, here it is at a glance.
http://www.2decide.com/table.htm

In addition this isn't the crazy stuff you hear about day to day or year to year in the media that somehow gets lost in the ether. I mean i have been listening to politicians say really stupid things for a long time now.

Do i like Ron Paul? yes. Do i like everything about Ron Paul? Clearly no. But in my reading and listening the other candidate are no better. He is again in my opinion the lesser of all the evils.

I would also like to point out that NONE of the candidates have done or said anything about the genocide in Darfur. Which is a travesty in my opinion.

Lastly as in all of my previous posts, you can see I repeatedly point out that these are my opinions.

[comhcinc]

that's a neat trick. the ol' cut and paste large amounts of information without answering the question posed. you dislike the others' positions....i get it. but none of them has ever said anything like "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided." Ron Paul on Race (http://www.tnr.com/downloads/sponraceterrorism.pdf) that's a pdf btw.

he has made these statements or allowed other to make these statements in his name. no in all your vagueness no body else comes close.

[autodas]

hmmm

I thought you were for welfare comchinc. That's how welfare came to be, to quell the angry mob that's attacking the successful (in this case, private businesses)

I believe that quote came from a ghost writer for Ron Paul. I do not agree with some of Ron Paul's views but he is the closest candidate to what I envision.

[comhcinc]

i saw no other name attached to that newsletter other than Ron Paul. the author used "I" in the piece. why if Paul didn't believe that would he allow someone to say those things in his name?

[jason-h]

"without answering the question posed."
You never actually posed a question.

"the ol' cut and paste large amounts of information"
I read all of that and tons more to inform myself.
and you asked me to show you.
"...and show me." remember?
i suggested that you look closer and you did not. you merely slung an insult and asked me to do the leg work.

"i have yet to find any thing as bad as saying Martian Luther King Jr...."
"he has made these statements or allowed other to make these statements in his name. no in all your vagueness no body else comes close."
No one else comes close?
So you're saying calling people gooks and hiring racists to spokesman your campaign isn't that bad?
So you're saying that agreeing to SIGN a constitutional ban on gay marriage isn't that bad?

I can see that our world view and politics are completely different. Which is good, but you either don't care about how crappy the other candidates are or you didn't actually read my post.
"...in all your vagueness ..."
so you are saying that my post was vague. Well i don't know what you want then. i mean i thought i was hooking it up. I thought i went overboard when i went and found you some examples and paraphrased the really tedious parts.

"that's a neat trick. the ol' cut and paste large amounts of information..."
large amounts of information is what good political policy is made of. I do my best to read what i can. i refuse to reduce politics to soundbytes and the empty 30 second "debates" we have on tv. Again i have to be able to sleep at night.

and as i write this and go over it in my head, i'm sure you didn't read my post and i think you didn't read your own pdf in its entirety either. i'll tell you why too. your snippet didn't include anything about the good citizens he mentioned or who else suffered from the riot. you took the part that could be the worst part especially taken out of the context. well here's the other side of that "opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, ie support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action. i know many who fall into this group personally and they deserve credit-- not as representatives of a racial group, but as decent people." That's from your pdf in case you missed it. he dismisses thier color and labels them decent people based on thier politics. Yeah he's horrible. you didn't acknowledge anything i specifically said or quoted. I think you're just trolling. I thought for a second this was an actual conversation where we were going to consider the others points and have intellectual debate and possibly help one another see something the other missed. i believe i was mistaken.

I am also sure that it's bad form to quote one's self but since i don't think you actually read it the first couple of times...
"Do i like Ron Paul? yes. Do i like everything about Ron Paul? Clearly no. But in my reading and listening the other candidates are no better. He is again in my opinion the lesser of all the evils."

[diane]

Okay, time out. No candidate is perfect. Last time I knew we were all human and therefore prone to do incredibly stupid things once in a while.

Now, since there are so many Ron Paul supporters here, I do have some questions that I have yet to get an answer for.

What is Ron Paul's stance on immigration? I read his website and listened to his debate answers but frankly what it seems he is saying is a bit unrealistic, so I think I am missing something. It seems to me that he wants to kick out all the illegal aliens (this being the unrealistic part), get rid of birthright citizenship-which I am assuming has got to be more nuanced than what he that since there are some aspects of birthright citizenship that are necessary, and ban illegals from all public services, including schools for the kids (which makes no sense to me at all from an economy/fiscal standpoint). I so I figure I am misunderstanding since these would just cause a whole host of issues that would really cause an "untouchable" class within our country and frankly is a whole hell of a lot worse than Clinton's serve in the military idea. Plus his website quotes the Heritage Foundation, and I get mail from them on a regular basis (they are always asking me for money) and they use some funky math so that didn't sit well with me.

Oh, and I read his website on healthcare and there is an aspect he does have wrong. It is an easy mistake, most people don't realize this but when he states "Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care", they already have this ability and have for decades. And that doesn't bring down the cost, it raises it, that is what collective bargaining does-unions do it all the time. This is why I live in a city that is towards the bottom of the lists when it comes to economic growth, wages, etc and yet we are one of the most expensive markets for healthcare in the Midwest. We have a large entity here that negotiates for 2000 docs and 9 hospitals, ultimately raising the price of healthcare for the whole market. And know one can really fight them on it because they are very well known and no insurance company dare to not have them in-network. But like I said, easy mistake. Healthcare is so complicated. It is such a mix of science and art, business and technology, it is hard to put a price on the confidence a patient feels in their doctor.

I have to say I do like Ron Paul's ideas on privacy and personal liberty. I can't help but feel he would have voted against the Indiana voter id law that is currently being reviewed by the Supreme Court. What a joke of a law. It is nothing more than a way to prevent people from voting, especially since there is no case in Indiana history that anyway has been prosecuted for attempting to impersonate someone else at a voting booth. Of all the forms of voter fraud that is possible, this should be the least of the concerns, simply because it is the most risk for the smallest reward.

Okay, this probably really long now, so I'll stop.

[crassius]

I find that there is a lot of truth in Mike Huckabee's criticism of President Bush's foreign policy as arrogant. I think many voters would agree that there have been many blunders in that arena. So, my consideration of humility in politics has lead me to Obama. In may interviews and in two of the national debates he has admitted, unlike many of the other contenders for the presidential nomination, to not having all the answers. Also when asked about a personal flaw of his, he actually answered the question and listed a flaw.

Much of what I have articulated also applies to McCain, but while i respect that greatly, my opposition to the Iraq war poisons his viability.

Also, I have been deeply turned off by Hillary's campaign as the inevitable candidate. That because of her experience, its her time in line to be president and the others need to step aside. That seems to be more of an expression of hubris than humility.