Personally I like Chuck Hagel. He is from an extremely strong republican state of Nebraska. He was the first republican to actually speak out about the poorly run war in iraq. I think he would be a good choice, but who do you like and why?
2006-06-07 03:54:05 · 15 answers · asked by takeashot30 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
How can you say Chuck isn't a true republican, he's from Nebraska. I didn't think they could vote anything that smelled like democrat in for president.
2006-06-07 04:04:57 · update #1
Who is Michael Savage?
2006-06-07 12:47:21 · update #2
Michael Savage - Dr. Savage would fix things
2006-06-07 04:11:29 · answer #1 · answered by Dan W 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hagel has no chance... mostly for the reasons you like him. In fact it will not be any member of the sitting Congress. Senators and Representatives have too many party line votes to explain (giving ammunition to their opponents) and usually no experience in the executive branch of government running a large group of people.
My guess; The republican nominee will be Bill Owens, Governor of Colorado. Second choice would be Rick Perry, Gov of Texas or Jeb Bush of Florida.
If I was the Dems I would try and find a southern state Gov... we saw how well that worked out for them last time.
2006-06-12 12:28:16 · answer #2 · answered by jamesllegade 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I recommend that the better decrease for contributions be performed away with, and that the optimal payouts in retirement nonetheless proceed to be as they are, adjusted for inflation. Social protection isn't a "supply away" software yet one which all of us make a contribution to love a fee reductions plan, and should be shielded from different makes use of with assistance from the authorities. Do you compromise or disagree and why? when you're so fearful about it then why not; first placed it decrease back into the own sector and make to were no can take out money from it for his or her very own interest, second pay decrease back each and every penny you've borrowed from both Social protection and Medicare, third take the unlawful immigrants off of it and those who come over the following yet in no way paid a penny to it, and ultimately have it a similar for each man or woman; in different words authorities officials are to participate in it and in the adventure that they prefer some thing extra they do it on their very own without the tax payers funding it?yet, the commercial stytem feeding the imbalances had in no way been really replaced. They, a set of scholars, stated that each and each and every man or woman prices of interest may be 3% or a lot less for each man or woman to grow to be wealthy if wanted (that should be authentic also to taces). the most acceptable monetary problem may be, they reported, even as there have been no prices of interest. Why not do this answer? the wealthy may nonetheless be wealthy. My question is: even as soial protection turns right into an issue appropriate to federal expenses, why not artwork with a balanced or benefit funds and spend no more effective than is obtainable in, as any kinfolk has to attempt for? Why not ban all loobying presents as a way to get rules that serve the rustic? God bless united states.
2016-11-14 07:53:22 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If I was republican I would vote for McCain he is a good old con with old school ideas. I believe the Republican party these days has been hijacked by large corporations that put profits in front of peoples well being and cloud the Americans vision with flag burning and gays instead of the rising crime rate and low wages and health care etc.
2006-06-07 04:08:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chuck Hagel started being critical of Bush when Bush became a political liability. Hagel never saw a war he didn't like.
2006-06-07 03:58:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
with the ticket open i hope for someone who will bring a good agenda for the country first and the people second.the reason i put the country first is terrorism economy and safety of the citizens.and also it would be nice if the Democrats have to scratch their head and admit it will be a hard decision on who to vote for.I am a republican
2006-06-07 04:02:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jeb Bush. I vote for 4 more years of total chaos and corruption!
In all honesty, if we could just have 1 person that I actually want to vote for and not pick the lesser of two evils, I'll be happy, regardless of the political party.
2006-06-07 03:55:55 · answer #7 · answered by Pitchow! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Newt despite the corruption scandals.... He did some good and he is not the Apocaliptic Extremist like our current president. The guy knows history and his policies seem tough but fair... That said I think I'll be voting Democratic unless they run another Kerry.
2006-06-07 03:59:06 · answer #8 · answered by Ilya R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you have your Limbic System half operational, you'd think twice about voting Republican. *Cons run to dictionary to find out what limbic system means. LOL *
2006-06-07 03:59:25 · answer #9 · answered by Kookoo Bananas 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Michael Savage is my man!
2006-06-07 05:01:47 · answer #10 · answered by plutocheshire 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋